# Paizo To Make Kingmaker Bestiary... For D&D 5E!



## mach1.9pants (May 3, 2019)

A Kingmaker hardcover compilation, I saw that coming. In PF 2E, I saw that coming. But a 5E add on and using crowdfunding, that's a bolt from the blue!


----------



## EthanSental (May 3, 2019)

Cool, I’ll have to check it out!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (May 3, 2019)

How many new monsters were in Kingmaker? Or are there a lot of Pathfinder critters in it that aren't already in 5E?

Even if this is just, effectively, a bunch of 5E stats to make the Kingmaker 2E work with 5E, this sounds pretty good. If it's a substantial collection of Paizo beasties for 5E, that's even better.


----------



## Malovech (May 3, 2019)

The door has cracked open...


----------



## robus (May 3, 2019)

Malovech said:


> The door has cracked open...




It was just a matter of time. 5e is now the 800lb gorilla in the RPG room.


----------



## robus (May 3, 2019)

mach1.9pants said:


> A Kingmaker hardcover compilation, I saw that coming. In PF 2E, I saw that coming. But a 5E add on and using crowdfunding, that's a bolt from the blue!




I’m pretty sure Morrus agrees. He’s been dismissing my Paizo 5e pivot proposals for a while now


----------



## Remus Lupin (May 3, 2019)

Kingmaker is ... _ten years old_? Excuse me while I go off and wonder where the last decade has gone.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (May 3, 2019)

I would love a Pathfinder bestiary with all true dragons (I means all dragons with category ages: imperial, outer, planar, primal..), to be translated to Spanish language like a selection. Devir doesn't want to translate more bestiaries.


----------



## oreofox (May 3, 2019)

This looks promising. A Paizo 5e book would be great. I never got to play Kingmaker, though I tried to run it once. I wonder if this will just contain the creatures from the Kingmaker modules bestiaries, or if it will contain more.


----------



## thundershot (May 3, 2019)

So let me get this straight... they’re doing a PF2E Kingmaker book.. and a 5E book essentially converts the things that need converted (monsters)


----------



## Ash Mantle (May 3, 2019)

I like that Paizo are starting small with a bestiary conversion for 5e rather than a full on conversion of the full adventure path. 
However, I'll also like a steamlined conversion of the kingdom building rules for 5e, as well as those awesome sidequest encounters in the form of the wanted posters in the front and back covers of the old softcover printings. I'm unsure if just a conversion of the bestiary sections from the Kingmaker AP will be enough to fill a hardcover, unless they also decide to include some other Pathfinder monsters, that fit into the theme of Kingmaker, from their bestiaries into the conversion. 

It'll also be cool if they could include the statblocks of some named characters from the AP as a whole, in the same vein as how Wizards includes named characters in the bestiary sections of their adventure modules.

I also appreciate that more details will be revealed in the upcoming months.


----------



## Mistwell (May 3, 2019)

Malovech said:


> The door has cracked open...




Yeah. They're dipping their toe in the water. 

If this sells well, I expect that door will be opened wide. 

The question is, are the rumors about 2e enthusiasm being on the weak side true and this is a sign they're looking at a backup plan? My guess is no, but I can't be sure. This is pretty surprising.


----------



## Ash Mantle (May 3, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> Yeah. They're dipping their toe in the water.
> 
> If this sells well, I expect that door will be opened wide.
> 
> The question is, are the rumors about 2e enthusiasm being on the weak side true and this is a sign they're looking at a backup plan? My guess is no, but I can't be sure. This is pretty surprising.




I think it'll help their market visibility, and if the 5e players like the content of what Paizo produces they might even start investing in Pathfinder 2.0, and Paizo could expand their sales that way. 
From what I've seen of the reception on their own forums though, it doesn't look promising, there's a few Pathfinder 1.0 players on that same thread who won't even buy a Pathfinder 2.0 compilation but will buy a Pathfinder 1.0 compilation in a heartbeat. But that's also just the forums.


----------



## Ash Mantle (May 3, 2019)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> How many new monsters were in Kingmaker? Or are there a lot of Pathfinder critters in it that aren't already in 5E?
> 
> Even if this is just, effectively, a bunch of 5E stats to make the Kingmaker 2E work with 5E, this sounds pretty good. If it's a substantial collection of Paizo beasties for 5E, that's even better.




From Stolen Lands, we get the Carbuncle, Drekavac, Elk, River Elk, Megaloceros, Taztlwrym, Thawn, Thylacine, Brush Thylacine.
From Rivers Run Red, we get Ceratiodi, The Grim White Stag, Hodag, Rorkoun, Trollhound.
From The Varnhold Vanishing, we get Blodeuwedd, Clawbat, Great Cyclops, Peluda, Stygira.
From Blood for Blood, we get Ahuizotl, Bog Strider, Calathgar, Fungus Leshy, Nuckelavee.
From War of the River Kings, we get First Blade, Irlgaunt, Verdurous Ooze, Greater Verdurous Ooze, Warsworn.
From Sound of a Thousand Screams, we get Ankou, Dweomercub, Dweomercat, Grodair, Skrik Nettle, Zomok. 

It should be noted that both the Grim White Stag and the First Blade are the semi-divine heralds of the Pathfinder gods Erastil and Gorum respectively, so hopefully there's some context of the deities they serve. 

If the wandering monster encounter tables feature some monsters that are in Pathfinder but not yet in 5e, they could work on converting those too.


----------



## mach1.9pants (May 3, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> Yeah. They're dipping their toe in the water.
> 
> If this sells well, I expect that door will be opened wide.
> 
> The question is, are the rumors about 2e enthusiasm being on the weak side true and this is a sign they're looking at a backup plan? My guess is no, but I can't be sure. This is pretty surprising.




If the answers on the Paizo forum are anything to go by, 2E is very divisive. Lots of 'no interest in 2E no sale' and 'can't believe they're supporting 5E before their own 1E' posts. More negative than positive. But, I guess, most of the Paizo forum peeps are the most invested in 1E.


----------



## Parmandur (May 3, 2019)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> How many new monsters were in Kingmaker? Or are there a lot of Pathfinder critters in it that aren't already in 5E?
> 
> Even if this is just, effectively, a bunch of 5E stats to make the Kingmaker 2E work with 5E, this sounds pretty good. If it's a substantial collection of Paizo beasties for 5E, that's even better.




According to Mike Mearls, the hardest part of Tales from the Yawning Portal was translating the 3.0 custom NPC stat blocks into 5E stat blocks: so it's more the specificity of 3.x NPC building that would necessitate that much information.


----------



## Parmandur (May 3, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> Yeah. They're dipping their toe in the water.
> 
> If this sells well, I expect that door will be opened wide.
> 
> The question is, are the rumors about 2e enthusiasm being on the weak side true and this is a sign they're looking at a backup plan? My guess is no, but I can't be sure. This is pretty surprising.




I'd say this is definitely testing interest in a backup plan, should the need arise.


----------



## Henrix (May 3, 2019)

Reaching out to make 5e players aware of their excellent adventure paths seems like a really good idea.

I'd love to see them cooperate with wizards to get some of their old Dungeon stuff out as well.


----------



## Paul Farquhar (May 3, 2019)

I figured Pathfinder 2nd edition was a bad idea with D&D resurgent...


----------



## Morrus (May 3, 2019)

robus said:


> I’m pretty sure Morrus agrees. He’s been dismissing my Paizo 5e pivot proposals for a while now




I am most certainly surprised!


----------



## Aldarc (May 3, 2019)

Paul Farquhar said:


> I figured Pathfinder 2nd edition was a bad idea with D&D resurgent...



Already doomsaying PF2 before it has been released?


----------



## EthanSental (May 3, 2019)

Paizo is around to make money from all channels.  I enjoyed their APs and I would pick it 5eversions of it.


----------



## Kramodlog (May 3, 2019)

Things aren't looking good for PF 2e. The pivot is a sign. 

If Paizo starts making 5e AP and supplements, it'll make 5e suddenly interesting.


----------



## Jacob Lewis (May 3, 2019)

Well this is a bold strategy. I can see that they kept a safe distance by hiring an outside company to be the experts of 5e material. And by providing just a bestiary rather than a full conversion, 5e fans would still need to purchase the main product which exposes them to PF2 system. Not a bad strategy. However...

What happens if the 5e supplement outsells the PF2 product? 

One of the biggest appeals of 5e for new gamers is the relatively small library of rule books and supplements required to stay current with the system. A book of new monsters will appeal only to 5e DMs who are hungry for more usable materials to run games. They may see value in running the campaign, but without further conversions on specialized rules used in Kingmaker, its still a hard sell.

But lets say they buy it, run it, even convert to PF2 because they like what they tasted in there. How many happy 5e players are going to jump ship because the new system appeals to their DM? Why leave the system they are already comfortable with and spent money for when the DM can just use the 5e supplement and adapt instead? It could happen, and most likely will in more than a few cases.

So Paizo makes a few more dollars on a 5e product. Obviously this is not their goal with this strategy. Otherwise they would have gone whole hog and done a full conversion and appeal to the 5e market. But if what I described happens on a larger scale and shows them they have a better oppurtunity to sell for 5e rather than their own product...

I really had hoped PF2 would stand out on its own. Maybe the gamble will pay off. We shall see.


----------



## darjr (May 3, 2019)

I am VERY interested in the bestiary. The campaign always seemed to mechanistic for me. I hope there is a tier for just the bestiary.


----------



## Azzy (May 3, 2019)

Hopefully, Paizo does more of these 5e bestiaries/conversions. I'd be very tempted to run some of their APs in 5e (without having to do the conversions myself).


----------



## kenmarable (May 3, 2019)

Ash Mantle said:


> I think it'll help their market visibility, and if the 5e players like the content of what Paizo produces they might even start investing in Pathfinder 2.0, and Paizo could expand their sales that way.




I believe all along Paizo has tried to position themselves as the sort of Advanced D&D to D&D in terms of complexity (not quality or anything like that, it's not a jab at D&D). They know their RPG is more complex than 5e (and 4e before that) and lean into that as a selling feature for those who prefer a more complex RPG experience. 

With 5e massively growing the number of gamers, some of them will eventually want games that are more involved with far more knobs and buttons for tweaking, and Paizo is smart to position themselves as that alternative. Their biggest problem, however, has probably been that they haven't had a lot of connection to the 5e community. They mostly (in my opinion) have relied on the massive momentum of gamers who loved 3.x but hated 4e to keep themselves going. With the crossover book as well as the new streaming game with Oblivion Oath, they can hopefully make some connections to the newer 5e fans.


----------



## Jer (May 3, 2019)

Jacob Lewis said:


> What happens if the 5e supplement outsells the PF2 product?




If it's good, it's pretty much guaranteed to outsell the PF2 product.  Because there are a lot more 5e players than PF players to start with, and not all of them will transition to PF2.

I admit I'm surprised - this is Paizo signalling that they're willing to give up on having their own game line and go back to being a D&D 3rd party publisher.  If they're going to do that why bother with a major revision for second edition PF at all?  Why not just clean up Pathfinder into a 1.5 edition and dual-stat their books for Pathfinder and 5e?


----------



## robus (May 3, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> I believe all along Paizo has tried to position themselves as the sort of Advanced D&D to D&D in terms of complexity (not quality or anything like that, it's not a jab at D&D). They know their RPG is more complex than 5e (and 4e before that) and lean into that as a selling feature for those who prefer a more complex RPG experience.




Agreed and that's kind of why I was surprised that PathFinder 2nd edition didn't pivot to be Advanced 5e. Lots of folks on here have decried the lack of chargen options and high level play support in 5e. Paizo could have gone after that market:



> Bored with the standard D&D 5e options and tired of the sloppy adventures WotC produces? Introducing Pathfinder 2.0! This rules expansion takes your game to the next level, bringing all the things you love in 5e but giving you more power, control, flexibility and adventures from the most experienced RPG development team in the business!




Or something like that


----------



## Parmandur (May 3, 2019)

Jer said:


> If it's good, it's pretty much guaranteed to outsell the PF2 product.  Because there are a lot more 5e players than PF players to start with, and not all of them will transition to PF2.
> 
> I admit I'm surprised - this is Paizo signalling that they're willing to give up on having their own game line and go back to being a D&D 3rd party publisher.  If they're going to do that why bother with a major revision for second edition PF at all?  Why not just clean up Pathfinder into a 1.5 edition and dual-stat their books for Pathfinder and 5e?




Well, if the major revision doesn't pan out financially, it is good to have something solid to fall back on.


----------



## Jer (May 3, 2019)

robus said:


> Agreed and that's kind of why I was surprised that PathFinder 2nd edition didn't pivot to be Advanced 5e.




Why bother with a second edition at all tho if you're just going to make it "Advanced 5e"?  Why not just put out an "Advanced Player's Guide" for D&D 5e if you're just going to start from the 5e base?  Much lower buy-in that way - you're not asking folks to change to an entirely new game, you're giving them more options for a game they already play.


----------



## Paul Farquhar (May 3, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> Already doomsaying PF2 before it has been released?




Hasn't it been released yet? I thought it had already sunk.


----------



## Parmandur (May 3, 2019)

Paul Farquhar said:


> Hasn't it been released yet? I thought it had already sunk.




Nah, they did a public playtest that was fairly contentious. The actual game comes out for GenCon.


----------



## kenmarable (May 3, 2019)

Jer said:


> Why bother with a second edition at all tho if you're just going to make it "Advanced 5e"?  Why not just put out an "Advanced Player's Guide" for D&D 5e if you're just going to start from the 5e base?  Much lower buy-in that way - you're not asking folks to change to an entirely new game, you're giving them more options for a game they already play.




An "Advanced Player's Guide" for 5e would be an interesting book, but it's just that - 1 book.

That's not what Paizo is doing. They have always positioned themselves as an entire alternative RPG with multiple product lines that is more complex that D&D for those who want it. They have never been and are not interested in being "D&D plus some options." 

Considering how many years they have been going strong and how they outclass nearly every other RPG publisher out there other than WotC (and did even better than WotC for a while, too), it seems to be working pretty well for them.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (May 3, 2019)

_Adjusts glasses, checks date. _

No, not April 1st. 

_Checks weather.com for current conditions in hell._ 

No, hasn’t frozen over…

I’m entirely surprised. A Bestiary is an interesting start - presumably to help folks run this in 5e. I can certainly always use more monsters, though. Personally, I’d like to see a magic item collection – Pathfinder has had some very cool ones that would be fun to see in 5e.


----------



## thundershot (May 3, 2019)

Maybe rather than doom and gloom, Paizo just wants to make more money? 5E is doing great and extra dough is never a bad thing. Pathfinder was there for me when 4E failed me. But when 5E came out, I found my system of preference. Is it perfect? Nope. But it’s easy and fun, especially useful when teaching my children to play. 2E was the best. Over the top abilities and no concern for balance? It was just fun. But not the easiest system to learn with an 8 and 11 year old.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (May 3, 2019)

The bestiaries are a good way to update the modules. I mean the modules are mainly the stories and plot, and you can use a module for a previous edition if you have got the updated stats of monsters. 

Now I wonder about we could see a 5th Ed version of Pathfinder classes (inquisitor, knight, oracle, gunslinger, witch, alchemist, summoner...), and how the counter-strike by WotC would be, maybe a Pathfinder version of dragonborn, warlock, and other classes as dread necromancer, archivist or artificer.


----------



## MechaTarrasque (May 3, 2019)

I haven't played it, but there is a list of monsters at https://pathfinderkingmaker.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Bestiary.  Linnorms are always fun (you want to kill it, but you don't want to be the one who actually kills it).


----------



## Jer (May 3, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> That's not what Paizo is doing. They have always positioned themselves as an entire alternative RPG with multiple product lines that is more complex that D&D for those who want it. They have never been and are not interested in being "D&D plus some options."




That response was specifically in response to robus saying:



> Agreed and that's kind of why I was surprised that PathFinder 2nd edition didn't pivot to be Advanced 5e.




If they were going to do Advanced 5e and try to get that market, then it makes no sense to make a second edition of Pathfinder - just write some 5e books that will attract the 5e players looking for more crunchy stuff and new character classes.  

And while I agree that's not what Paizo is doing currently, this move to make a 5e compatible bestiary suggests very strongly that they are now willing to concede that Pathfinder as an RPG may not be the right approach for where the market is now and they need to start planning to be able to pivot to something else.  That's not where I would have suspected they were as a company even yesterday, so I'm honestly shocked by it.


----------



## Worrgrendel (May 3, 2019)

I love how Pathfinder referred to 5th edition in their post:

The blog announcement says "[FONT=&amp]Finally, we'll add a hardcover _Kingmaker Bestiary_  for 5E, developed in conjunction with industry leaders in third-party  5E publishing, allowing players of the _*current*_ edition of the world's _*oldest *_ (emphasis mine) RPG the chance to experience the rich and detailed storylines  that have made the _Kingmaker Adventure Path_ a fan favorite for a decade."[/FONT]

Current and Oldest. LOL. Instead of the "5th edition of the world's greatest RPG". LOL. I see what you did there.


----------



## epithet (May 3, 2019)

Henrix said:


> Reaching out to make 5e players aware of their excellent adventure paths seems like a really good idea.
> 
> I'd love to see them cooperate with wizards to get some of their old Dungeon stuff out as well.




I'd throw money at a 5e _Age of Worms_ hardcover.


----------



## Wrathamon (May 3, 2019)

That would be a good conversion for Wotc to make. Not sure if Paizo owns the rights to that.

Paizo is in a tough spot. Sales of pathfinder have plummeted. A lot of fans that went to pathfinder because they didn't like 4e have come back for 5e. PF 2e isn't sitting well with a % of their fans. Starfinder is the only signing spot and it's good to see them throwing more support towards it. But, to be honest an Advanced 5e Starfinder would be a huge hit imo and I would prefer it over the older d20 chassis version.


----------



## billd91 (May 3, 2019)

Paul Farquhar said:


> I figured Pathfinder 2nd edition was a bad idea with D&D resurgent...




Not really much choice, I figure. They can't really add much to the PF1 rules and I'd be willing to bet that sales were dropping on the later entries and that's not good for the business plan. Plus, they've been wanting to do a version not so constrained by backward compatibility for some time. Ultimately, after 10 years of PF on top of a rule structure several years older than that, the game *needed* a clean-up edition at the minimum. But if you're gonna do that, might as well fix some other things that have been bothering them...


----------



## billd91 (May 3, 2019)

robus said:


> Agreed and that's kind of why I was surprised that PathFinder 2nd edition didn't pivot to be Advanced 5e. Lots of folks on here have decried the lack of chargen options and high level play support in 5e. Paizo could have gone after that market:




And risk being too closely tied to someone else's IP again. Being the #1 third party support for D&D burned them once before, of course they're going to be wary of basing their plans on WotC and whether or not they think WotC'll stick with 5e or swerve into another incompatible edition change with restrictive licensing as they did with the 4e project.


----------



## MockingBird (May 3, 2019)

This is interesting. I feel like it's a smart move for sure. Hopefully we will eventually get a Rise of the Runelords conversion.


----------



## billd91 (May 3, 2019)

epithet said:


> I'd throw money at a 5e _Age of Worms_ hardcover.




So would I, but Paizo has no control over that - WotC does.


----------



## robus (May 3, 2019)

billd91 said:


> And risk being too closely tied to someone else's IP again. Being the #1 third party support for D&D burned them once before, of course they're going to be wary of basing their plans on WotC and whether or not they think WotC'll stick with 5e or swerve into another incompatible edition change with restrictive licensing as they did with the 4e project.




Yep definitely a difficult business decision, but the size of 5e is huge and shows no sign of stopping.


----------



## billd91 (May 3, 2019)

MockingBird said:


> This is interesting. I feel like it's a smart move for sure. Hopefully we will eventually get a Rise of the Runelords conversion.




Monster books might be a good way to go about it. Get people to buy their PDFs or other AP materials, then get them to buy the 5e monster supplement for it to handle most of the stat blocks.


----------



## epithet (May 3, 2019)

billd91 said:


> So would I, but Paizo has no control over that - WotC does.




The message I was replying to, though, was wishing for Paizo and Wiz to cooperate to get some old Dungeon stuff republished. AoW seems like an obvious first choice for that, though I have to admit I'd be leery of working directly with Wizards again if I were Paizo.


----------



## Inchoroi (May 3, 2019)

I'd love to be involved in the 5e Bestiary, personally...


----------



## Azzy (May 3, 2019)

epithet said:


> I'd throw money at a 5e _Age of Worms_ hardcover.




That, Savage Tides, the other Dungeon AP, and some of the early PF APs.


----------



## coyote6 (May 3, 2019)

I would love a 5e bestiary for Skull & Shackles. 

Even better, WotC and Paizo can collaborate to release 5e Greyhawk, with Age of Worms and/or Savage Tides as part of that.


----------



## Remathilis (May 3, 2019)

They BETTER not release a Savage Tides 5e conversion after I've spent so much time converting it myself!!


----------



## lyle.spade (May 3, 2019)

That was the first AP I ran using PF rules, after we dumped 4e. It's actually the only AP I ever ran as completely as our group wanted (we excluded the last book because we took the story in a different direction after the big war in book 5). I've toyed with running it again, using 5e and now....well, this makes it that much easier.

Perhaps after a few months of Conan this will be on deck.

Very cool.


----------



## Staffan (May 3, 2019)

epithet said:


> The message I was replying to, though, was wishing for Paizo and Wiz to cooperate to get some old Dungeon stuff republished. AoW seems like an obvious first choice for that, though I have to admit I'd be leery of working directly with Wizards again if I were Paizo.




My impression from reading the retrospective blog posts they made a few years back is that Paizo and Wizards parted on good terms, and Wizards even extended a fair bit of extra good will toward Paizo (e.g. extending the licenses a few months longer so they could finish the adventure path). Here's what Lisa Stevens had to say about it:


> I have to give Wizards of the Coast a lot of praise for how they handled the end of the license. Contractually, they only needed to deliver notice of non-renewal by the end of December 2006; without the extra seven months' notice they chose to give us, I'm not sure that Paizo could have survived. Wizards also granted our request to extend the license through August 2007 so that we could finish up the Savage Tide adventure path. This gave us quite a bit of time to figure out how we were going to cope with the end of the magazines. It would have been very easy for WotC to have handled this in a way which would have effectively left Paizo for dead—all they would have had to do was follow the letter of the contract. Instead, they treated us like the valued partner we had been, giving us the ability to both plan and execute a strategy for survival. For that, I will always be thankful.




I mean, losing the licenses was still a blow for Paizo, but I don't think there was any malice there - Wizards was just going in another direction.


----------



## M.T. Black (May 3, 2019)

There is easy money on the table for Paizo, converting some of their classic APs to 5e. It would self-fund via crowdfunding and they could contract out the actual work to Kobold etc. 

I suspect the only thing stopping them is that their existing fan base would revolt, possibly seeing it as the beginning of the end for PF. But I suspect it is inevitable...


----------



## Jester David (May 3, 2019)

Ash Mantle said:


> From Stolen Lands, we get the Carbuncle, Drekavac, Elk, River Elk, Megaloceros, Taztlwrym, Thawn, Thylacine, Brush Thylacine.
> From Rivers Run Red, we get Ceratiodi, The Grim White Stag, Hodag, Rorkoun, Trollhound.
> From The Varnhold Vanishing, we get Blodeuwedd, Clawbat, Great Cyclops, Peluda, Stygira.
> From Blood for Blood, we get Ahuizotl, Bog Strider, Calathgar, Fungus Leshy, Nuckelavee.
> ...



Plus all the NPCs. And likely anything from Bestiary 2 or Tomb or Horrors Complete that were included.


----------



## Jester David (May 3, 2019)

I discussed this a lot in a thread in the Pathfinder sub forum, where I was discussing 5e conversions and monsters books for Pathfinder. 

I loved the idea, as Pathfinder’s APs are significantly stronger than WotC’s adventures. 
BUT
As someone pointed out on that thread, the time to do so would have been 2-3 years ago, when people were hungry for more adventures and monsters. Now we have lots of both for 5e alread: we have eight official adventure and two monsters splatbooks, plus four or five excellent third party monster books. 
They _*should*_ have done this for Curse of the Crimson Throne back in 2016.

This will still likely sell very, very well and potentially boost sales of Kingmaker if it allows you to completely run the adventure. (Such as giving all the necassary monsters and including a conversion of the kingdom building rules.)



> developed in conjunction with industry leaders in third-party 5E publishing



Have they announced who that is? I wonder why they didn’t name names...

Kobold Press would be my guess, as that company has a great relationship with both Paizo and WotC. 
But Goodman Games is another option. Heck, Nord Games would also turn out a solid product.


----------



## Mistwell (May 3, 2019)

mach1.9pants said:


> If the answers on the Paizo forum are anything to go by, 2E is very divisive. Lots of 'no interest in 2E no sale' and 'can't believe they're supporting 5E before their own 1E' posts. More negative than positive. But, I guess, most of the Paizo forum peeps are the most invested in 1E.




Yes I've seen those. But I also assume the people happy with things tend to not post about it, they're just quietly happy with them. I have a hard time believing 2e won't do well. But...I am not positive. And this tentative 5e support makes me at least raise the question.


----------



## Jester David (May 3, 2019)

M.T. Black said:


> There is easy money on the table for Paizo, converting some of their classic APs to 5e. It would self-fund via crowdfunding and they could contract out the actual work to Kobold etc.
> 
> I suspect the only thing stopping them is that their existing fan base would revolt, possibly seeing it as the beginning of the end for PF. But I suspect it is inevitable...



Paizo’s fans are loyal, but they also listen and engage with the company. 
If Paizo’s staff is honest and comes out and says “we don’t support Edition wars, because we’re all gamers, and these products aren’t coming at the expense of Pathfinder products” or even “the fans have been asking for 5e support, so we’re giving that audience what they want” it will quickly end any revolt. 

Especially as there are two or three Paizo alumni working for WotC now.


----------



## Mistwell (May 3, 2019)

Remathilis said:


> They BETTER not release a Savage Tides 5e conversion after I've spent so much time converting it myself!!




Oh come on. I did that too, and it wasn't so bad.

I mean, after I was done I have not converted anything since. And my eye twitches every time I consider converting another adventure path. But not so bad.


----------



## turkeygiant (May 4, 2019)

Honestly the Pathfinder forums are a terrible place to look if you want to judge how 2.0 is going to be received, the only people commenting on there are the people who hate it, its just a fact of the internet that people rarely invest time to saying they like something. As a former Pathfinder player and a current 5e player Pathfinder 2.0 is really quite appealing to me, I like almost everything about it except for its still bloated bonus progression which I guess was too much of a sacred cow to completely cut (even if I think it would have made the game so much better).


----------



## turkeygiant (May 4, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> I believe all along Paizo has tried to position themselves as the sort of Advanced D&D to D&D in terms of complexity (not quality or anything like that, it's not a jab at D&D). They know their RPG is more complex than 5e (and 4e before that) and lean into that as a selling feature for those who prefer a more complex RPG experience.
> 
> With 5e massively growing the number of gamers, some of them will eventually want games that are more involved with far more knobs and buttons for tweaking, and Paizo is smart to position themselves as that alternative. Their biggest problem, however, has probably been that they haven't had a lot of connection to the 5e community. They mostly (in my opinion) have relied on the massive momentum of gamers who loved 3.x but hated 4e to keep themselves going. With the crossover book as well as the new streaming game with Oblivion Oath, they can hopefully make some connections to the newer 5e fans.




I think the one place where Pathfinder 2.0 is going to fail as a crunchier upgrade from 5e is in it's bonus progression. At least in my experience that transition to bounded accuracy in 5e was kinda a revelation, its not something I would easily go back on even if the other elements of more complex crunch in Pathfinder 2.0 do appeal to me.


----------



## turkeygiant (May 4, 2019)

Wrathamon said:


> That would be a good conversion for Wotc to make. Not sure if Paizo owns the rights to that.
> 
> Paizo is in a tough spot. Sales of pathfinder have plummeted. A lot of fans that went to pathfinder because they didn't like 4e have come back for 5e. PF 2e isn't sitting well with a % of their fans. Starfinder is the only signing spot and it's good to see them throwing more support towards it. But, to be honest an Advanced 5e Starfinder would be a huge hit imo and I would prefer it over the older d20 chassis version.




I was so ready for Stafinder, it sounded so good and their credo that they would put what was good for Starfinder ahead of backwards compatibility sounded like a great development decision, but in the end it was just too much Pathfinder and not enough of its own beast. I grabbed the pdf and my gaming group looked it over but we pretty much unanimously agreed that it just wasn't what we were looking for in sci-fi. There was just too much in the base of the game that reminded us of what made pathfinder such a slog to play years ago before we bailed for 5e.


----------



## GreyLord (May 4, 2019)

Well, with this announcement it may be enough for me to want to buy the Kingmaker Hardcover and the 5e bestiary that comes with it.


----------



## robus (May 4, 2019)

turkeygiant said:


> I was so ready for Stafinder, it sounded so good and their credo that they would put what was good for Starfinder ahead of backwards compatibility sounded like a great development decision, but in the end it was just too much Pathfinder and not enough of its own beast. I grabbed the pdf and my gaming group looked it over but we pretty much unanimously agreed that it just wasn't what we were looking for in sci-fi. There was just too much in the base of the game that reminded us of what made pathfinder such a slog to play years ago before we bailed for 5e.




Have you checked out Esper Genesis? https://alligatoralleyentertainment.com/espergenesis/


----------



## MNblockhead (May 4, 2019)

Jer said:


> I admit I'm surprised - this is Paizo signalling that they're willing to give up on having their own game line and go back to being a D&D 3rd party publisher.  If they're going to do that why bother with a major revision for second edition PF at all?  Why not just clean up Pathfinder into a 1.5 edition and dual-stat their books for Pathfinder and 5e?




Well, I don't think they'll give up on the their own game line just yet, but they do seem to be hedging their bets. Starfinder is their own system so that's another hedge.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 4, 2019)

turkeygiant said:


> I was so ready for Stafinder, it sounded so good and their credo that they would put what was good for Starfinder ahead of backwards compatibility sounded like a great development decision, but in the end it was just too much Pathfinder and not enough of its own beast. I grabbed the pdf and my gaming group looked it over but we pretty much unanimously agreed that it just wasn't what we were looking for in sci-fi. There was just too much in the base of the game that reminded us of what made pathfinder such a slog to play years ago before we bailed for 5e.




Same here. Really just felt like D&D in space. And, really, didn't feel like it was in space much at all. Would have been better to either go the spelljammer route and assume a fantasical version of reality with crystal spheres, etc. or play up the space concept a bit more seriously. To be fair, my experience has only been a few Convention games, but it just didn't grab me. 

I like playing the PF 2 playtest more than I did Starfinder, but it wasn't a different enough system from 5e to make me want to invest my time and money into it. 

There has been a glut of excellent new games and settings and adventures in the bast few years and I'm losing my appetite. Something needs to be very compelling to get me to open my wallet these days. 

Now, if Paizo would have put out 5e material 3-4 years ago, I expect my shelves would be full of their material instead of Kobold Press and Frog God Games.


----------



## Emirikol_Prime (May 4, 2019)

robus said:


> Have you checked out Esper Genesis? https://alligatoralleyentertainment.com/espergenesis/




This.   It's an amazing and quite overlooked sci-fi take on 5E.


----------



## Tom Miskey (May 4, 2019)

Ash Mantle said:


> I think it'll help their market visibility, and if the 5e players like the content of what Paizo produces they might even start investing in Pathfinder 2.0, and Paizo could expand their sales that way.
> From what I've seen of the reception on their own forums though, it doesn't look promising, there's a few Pathfinder 1.0 players on that same thread who won't even buy a Pathfinder 2.0 compilation but will buy a Pathfinder 1.0 compilation in a heartbeat. But that's also just the forums.



In the Pathfinder group I play in, I'm the only one who bought the preview book version for 2E.  The rest of the group has no intention of changing to 2E even when the actual 2E core rulebooks are released. I may buy them if there is a massive group of PF players that review it positively, but right now, I don't think I'd ever get a chance to play it if I did...  I may just wait till a later printing, since Paizo seems to incorporate errata and updates in later printings.  I still have the 1st printings of all the 1E PF books, and sometimes we find out that a rule was changed in  a newer printing.


----------



## John R Davis (May 4, 2019)

Kingmaker was fantastic when we played it ten years ago. Having a full 5th ed version to bring it up to date with a streamlined rules set would get my money!


----------



## CapnZapp (May 4, 2019)

turkeygiant said:


> too much of a sacred cow to completely cut (even if I think it would have made the game so much better).



That is my general fear too.

Actually that's a very succinct way of explaining why I would have wanted Paizo to use 5E as their base. And then add back the things we miss from there.

Because whatever you may think of that game 5E truly did cut those sacred cows that kept d20 from becoming great.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 4, 2019)

turkeygiant said:


> I think the one place where Pathfinder 2.0 is going to fail as a crunchier upgrade from 5e is in it's bonus progression. At least in my experience that transition to bounded accuracy in 5e was kinda a revelation, its not something I would easily go back on even if the other elements of more complex crunch in Pathfinder 2.0 do appeal to me.



This is a brilliant illustration of my point - that there is a before 5E and an after 5E and that Paizo is not even realizing the market has shifted to a point where several of their mechanisms are not palatable any longer.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 4, 2019)

Jer said:


> I admit I'm surprised - this is Paizo signalling that they're willing to give up on having their own game line and go back to being a D&D 3rd party publisher.  If they're going to do that why bother with a major revision for second edition PF at all?  Why not just clean up Pathfinder into a 1.5 edition and dual-stat their books for Pathfinder and 5e?




Or alternatively, why aren't they making a Pathfinder 2 that hews closely to 5E while not claiming exact compatibility; offering greater play crunch with only a small hurdle (since the game offers all the great improvements 5E brought to the table: fixed LFQW, easy monster prep, even a version of bounded accuracy that's just not as bounded, true tanks and damage dealers, magic item pricing, deeper tactical experience with high-level monsters built to withstand player abilities and do much more


----------



## CapnZapp (May 4, 2019)

John R Davis said:


> Kingmaker was fantastic when we played it ten years ago. Having a full 5th ed version to bring it up to date with a streamlined rules set would get my money!



Yes a complete product where all conversion is already completed!


----------



## BMaC (May 4, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> Now, if Paizo would have put out 5e material 3-4 years ago, I expect my shelves would be full of their material instead of Kobold Press and Frog God Games.



Same here.  Harsh truth.


----------



## Aldarc (May 4, 2019)

Paul Farquhar said:


> Hasn't it been released yet? I thought it had already sunk.



The playtest ended in Autumn 2018, but it will not be released until August 2019.


----------



## Zarithar (May 4, 2019)

Excellent news. I love their products but gave up on PF a few years back. I'll definitely be picking this up.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (May 4, 2019)

Now I wonder about this book could be linked with the videogame. 

Other matter is about if we really need nPCs when if we know the plot and we only need to add a "race+class" to create or update those characters.


----------



## WeaponizedInk (May 4, 2019)

This is good news. I hope it keeps up because there are a couple other APs I would love to see in collected hardcovers and 5e ready.


----------



## darjr (May 4, 2019)

Paizo could have done a 5e without hitching their ride to WOTC.

They just had to follow their original playbook. Take the 5e stuff released under OGL and do their own rulebook. Release pf1.0 books for a while after and then transition to their new book.

Imagine a 5e pathfinder society?

5e is under the OGL and has an SRD.

To me the surprise move WAS pf2e. I still don’t quite understand it.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (May 4, 2019)

I imagine a 5e Golarion, but it wouldn't be background or lore, but monsters, races and classes. 

Why not a Pathfinder version of warlock and dragonborn?


----------



## MNblockhead (May 4, 2019)

Tom Miskey said:


> I may just wait till a later printing, since Paizo seems to incorporate errata and updates in later printings.  I still have the 1st printings of all the 1E PF books, and sometimes we find out that a rule was changed in  a newer printing.




This is one reason I love D&D Beyond. Material is automatically updated. 

With the RealmWorks content market live, the same will be true for Pathfinder material you buy for RealmWorks, but RealmWorks is a heavy campaign-management application the requires Windows to run. 

Pathfinder needs its version of D&D Beyond. Yeah, I know, Paizo is great about PDF files, but they just are not as convenient. 

Maybe Roll 20 can play the role of providing Web-friendly, hyperlinked, and easily-searchable PF books.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 4, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> This is a brilliant illustration of my point - that there is a before 5E and an after 5E and that Paizo is not even realizing the market has shifted to a point where several of their mechanisms are not palatable any longer.




Not disagreeing with your general observations, but I have to quibble with your characterization of Paizo not understanding their market. I find it hard to believe that they are "not even realizing the market as shifted...."  But effectively responding to market changes is far more difficult than seeing them. 

As someone who missed out on all the edition wars and the rise of Pathfinder, what I don't understand is why Paizo has not come out with any other systems all these years. To put it as charitably as I can, they do not seem to be designers of unique game systems. They just copied open-sourced D&D and added lots of additional rules. Nothing in their crunch seems compelling to this 1e player who got back into TTRPGs with 5e.  As I start to branch out beyond D&D, no rule system but out by Paizo has compelled me to spend money on it, even after making the effort to try them out (PF 2.0 and Starfinder) at PFS/SFS convention events. 

Yet, there are so many other systems coming out. Too many for me to even to even read about in my limited time. Some seem to be doing quite well for the companies publishing them. It seems that Paizo is like Hollywood in that it is difficult for them to take a risk on something new and original. For the effort to be worth it, they need a blockbuster. And this is the problem. I don't see Pathfinder 2 being that blockbuster. It may be a good system. I certainly enjoyed it. But I find it difficult to believe it will attract a sufficient number of new users to make up for the PF 1 players who refuse to embrace it.  

It seems that Paizo needs to take some risks now. Maybe that is coming up with a new game system that is a complete departure from d20 mechanics.


----------



## MockingBird (May 4, 2019)

I just checked out Paizo's forums so I could see for myself. It does indeed look like PF2e is divisive. Theres a lot of "not gonna switch" proclamations. I'm curious to see how this evolves when 2e finally drops. Also seems to be some resentment for a 5e inclusion for Kingmaker and not 1e. Someone made a great point about the loud minority though. I missed the PF1e play test so I'm not sure how to compare the transparency between the two. Its interesting to watch from the side lines. I remember a lot of the same going on with D&D Next/5e.


----------



## qstor (May 4, 2019)

5e is the 800 lb gorilla but I'll stick with PF1 hopefully 5e fans pick this up


----------



## robus (May 4, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> It seems that Paizo needs to take some risks now. Maybe that is coming up with a new game system that is a complete departure from d20 mechanics.




Yeah but there are tons of those too. Paizo’s brand is closely tied to D&D it really does seem like they should transition to providing their adventure paths in both PF 1e & D&D 5e formats (and sell bestiaries for both). That seems like the way to maximize things and then if/when WotC screws up 6e, they’ll be ready once more to rescue the unhappy 5e players 

It’s not pretty but it would probably be lucrative.

Edit: or at least PF 2e and 5e formats


----------



## Mercurius (May 4, 2019)

So let me read between the lines.

1) PF1 pretty much reached "peak edition," thus PF2.
2) PF2 is not being well-received by the hardcore base.
3) Paizo is dipping their toe into 5E waters.

Given that there probably wasn't anywhere to go with PF1, PF2 made sense. But given the wild popularity of 5E, chances are that there aren't many new fans that Paizo can attract to PF2, so it could theoretically be dead on arrival (not enough PF1 converters + few new players = dead on arrival). So...they're looking to expand into 5E.

Again, makes sense. They can keep PF1 alive as a "legacy game," maybe keep doing adventure paths. I suppose they can publish PF2 and see how it does, but at some point they probably have to choose two of three: PF1, PF2, and 5E. Given all of the above, I wouldn't be surprised to see PF2 fizzle out after a couple years.


----------



## EthanSental (May 4, 2019)

5e adventure paths would be something I’d purchase.  The first 8 or so APs were quality stuff that I played/read when we were playing PF from around 2010-2014.  

My feelings fall in line with Mercurius’ above.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (May 5, 2019)

5E seems like a good game. But it's lack of customization and options (relative to Pathfinder) prevents it from being a game that I want to play or run long term. 

Not everyone wants their Fantasy RPG to be D&D 5E. It may be the 500lb gorilla right now but it's a relatively unappealing 500lb gorilla to me. 

I'm not a huge fan of Pathfinder 2E as it was in the playtest, but the playtest for 1E was different than the finished product which is something alot of people and johnny come lately's on the Paizo forums seem to either not know or have forgotten that fact. 

My plan is to continue running Pathfinder 1E using the massive amounts of material available. Run PF 2E to learn and get used to the system. I plan on using 5E only to run classic adventures like Keep on the Borderlands or a converted Village of Hommlet possibly for new players exclusively as an intro to RPG's.  

I love how there are alot of people here saying that PF2 may be DOA. I remember many years ago many people on this forum saying the same thing about PF1. Granted the D&D brand was a lot weaker then, but the thing that the popular kids need to understand is that not everyone WANTS to play D&D. There are other options and PF IS one of those options. Also in this hobby people are more likely to crap all over something that ISNT the thing that they like or something that they like that is being changed in some significant way. Like I said wasnt a big fan of the playtest as a whole. There WERE things that I absolutely liked, the action economy system for one. 

Anyway I can see how Paizo supporting 5E instead of continuing to support 1E is seen as a betrayal of sorts. I see the spot that they are in though. And to be honest if gamers we'rent so selfishly myopic they would see that buisness wise what Paizo is doing is absolutley the smart play. 


Have support for thier new system in the form of a deluxe version of an older AP. 
Have support for the popular system of choice and introduce those gamers to Paizo AP's. If it sells well enough Paizo will probably start to convert more older AP's to both 5E and PF2. 
PF1 has had TEN YEARS of support with crap loads of products. 

While players can still play and run games of PF1 until the cows come home it's time for Paizo to move on.


----------



## Azzy (May 5, 2019)

ShinHakkaider said:


> I love how there are alot of people here saying that PF2 may be DOA. I remember many years ago many people on this forum saying the same thing about PF1. Granted the D&D brand was a lot weaker then, but the thing that the popular kids need to understand is that not everyone WANTS to play D&D. There are other options and PF IS one of those options. Also in this hobby people are more likely to crap all over something that ISNT the thing that they like or something that they like that is being changed in some significant way. Like I said wasnt a big fan of the playtest as a whole. There WERE things that I absolutely liked, the action economy system for one.




To be fair, the people here say that PF2 may be DOA are saying that in reaction to the myriad PF1 edition warriors that actively denounce PF rather than any feelings of ill will to Paizo or PF2 themselves. Personally, I hope PF2 is a success—successes in this hobby are a great thing for the rest of the community. And, besides, Paizo are good people. However, you lot have an edition war on your hands just from a cursory look at the Paizo forums. I hope that war dies in a fire when PF2 is released.


----------



## thundershot (May 5, 2019)

If Pazio produces books for 5E, I will buy them. I’m not changing systems again anytime soon. 5E is perfect for teaching my kids D&D.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 5, 2019)

ShinHakkaider said:


> 5E seems like a good game. But it's lack of customization and options (relative to Pathfinder) prevents it from being a game that I want to play or run long term.



And the heavy workload for the DM drove me away from d20/PF.

Look, we are many who are hungry for a game with more charbuild options: prestige classes, integrated magic item economy, and what not.

I just think the appetite for a game that doesn't offer easy NPC prep and thoroughly solved LFQW is much much lower in 2020 than in 2010 or in 2000. I don't think many RPG consumers will stand for it.

Also, every other publisher than WotC is a miniscule operation. The only reason Paizo could grow was because their game had an intimate relation to D&D proper. By going independent Paizo is likely joining the ranks of entirely inconsequential micro publishers.

I fear Paizo has completely missed the boat here. All the boats.


----------



## GreyLord (May 5, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> And the heavy workload for the DM drove me away from d20/PF.
> 
> Look, we are many who are hungry for a game with more charbuild options: prestige classes, integrated magic item economy, and what not.
> 
> ...




I personally do not feel the LFQW thing is even a FACTOR with how popular 5e has become.  If THAT was the deciding factor, 4e would have won the gambit by a long mile.

5e is successful because it is FAR easier to general people to learn, and when new players are coming to a game, ease of use is a major factor.

Eventually some may want something different, but for new players, 5e currently is one of the easiest games to learn within a short period that fall under the popular name brand of D&D (aka...any type of game that would fall under the D20 mechanic of games).

It has nothing to do with LFQW per se, and more to do with the fact that a LOT OF NEW gamers are coming into RPGs and are actually able to figure out how to play with a minimum amount of trouble and confusion.

That's the real key to 5e's success today.  It is attracting NEW gamers, rather than just appealing to old gamers who keep bringing up old thoughts such as LFQW and other relics of a bygone age of angst and discussion about "balance" and other items that seemed so pertinent 10-20 years ago.

This does not mean that you are not correct to some degree, but my personal feeling differs on why 5e is being so successful and what is actually bringing in new gamers (most of who have never even heard of LFQW).


----------



## Staffan (May 5, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> I just think the appetite for a game that doesn't offer easy NPC prep and thoroughly solved LFQW is much much lower in 2020 than in 2010 or in 2000. I don't think many RPG consumers will stand for it.




PF2 has done quite a lot to deal with LFQW, or at least tried. It's a bit hard to say based on the playtest, because magic was nerfed a bit too hard and they'll compensate a bit in the actual rules, but some changes:


Spell effect is based on spell level, not caster level. This is a harsher version than in 5e, because PF2 still has Vancian casting so if you want 5th level damage from your _fireball_, you need to *prepare* it at 5th level. Sorcerers can have a few spells where they can upcast them on the fly. On the upside, they are using upcast low-level spells to alter the spell in ways beyond the purely numeric (stronger effect/more targets) that 5e has. For example, instead of having both _charm person_ and _charm monster_, being able to affect non-humanoids is what happens when you cast _charm_ at 4th level.
Buff spells often require concentration, which takes up one action (out of three) each round.
Many debuffs have a weakened effect on a successful save, a moderate effect on a failed save, and a strong effect on a critically failed save. For example, _paralyze_ (the equivalent of _hold person_) gives the target slowed 1 (lose one action) for one round on a success, paralyzes them for one round on a failure, and paralyzes them for 4 rounds (with a save to break free each round) on a critical failure.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (May 5, 2019)

Azzy said:


> However, you lot have an edition war on your hands just from a cursory look at the Paizo forums. I hope that war dies in a fire when PF2 is released.




LOLZ. Edition War? Nah, compared to the switchover from 3.4 to 4.0 then to Pathfinder this is more like an edition skirmish. 

Maybe an Edition slap-fight...


----------



## ShinHakkaider (May 5, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> Also, every other publisher than WotC is a miniscule operation. The only reason Paizo could grow was because their game had an intimate relation to D&D proper. By going independent Paizo is likely joining the ranks of entirely inconsequential micro publishers.
> 
> I fear Paizo has completely missed the boat here. All the boats.




Paizo isn’t a minuscule operation. I want to say at this point that I think that they have more people working in house for them than the RPG dept at WOTC does. WOTC is a huge company but D&D is just one small part of that whole. And I really don’t think that there are as many people working Full Time in D&D than there are at Paizo.

As far as them missing the boat? Again with your micro publisher comment, I get the feeling that you don’t know that much about Paizo’s history and the background regarding the switch over from 3.5 to 4 and the reason that PF was formed to begin with. They got burned pretty badly hitching themselves to someone else’s properties. I think that their relative autonomy was/is a prime motivator here.


----------



## Morrus (May 5, 2019)

*Paizo To Make Kingmaker Bestiary... For D&amp;D 5E!*



ShinHakkaider said:


> Paizo isn’t a minuscule operation. I want to say at this point that I think that they have more people working in house for them than the RPG dept at WOTC does. WOTC is a huge company but D&D is just one small part of that whole. And I really don’t think that there are as many people working Full Time in D&D than there are at Paizo.
> 
> As far as them missing the boat? Again with your micro publisher comment, I get the feeling that you don’t know that much about Paizo’s history and the background regarding the switch over from 3.5 to 4 and the reason that PF was formed to begin with. They got burned pretty badly hitching themselves to someone else’s properties. I think that their relative autonomy was/is a prime motivator here.




Indeed. And FFG and Games Workshop. I don’t know how GW and WotC compare, but GW is a behemoth. It just has an entirely separate fan base.


----------



## Hussar (May 5, 2019)

I think the point that [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] was trying to make is that Pathfinder is a pretty small slice of the RPG market.  Considering that the RPG market without WotC producing any new books is about 15 million dollars (and that included 3e and 4e at the time), it's not really too much of a stretch to think that Pathfinder's market share isn't really large.  

I realize that the common wisdom is that WotC is the 600 pound gorilla, but, really, we don't know how the market slices up.


----------



## Jester David (May 5, 2019)

Hussar said:


> I think the point that [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] was trying to make is that Pathfinder is a pretty small slice of the RPG market.  Considering that the RPG market without WotC producing any new books is about 15 million dollars (and that included 3e and 4e at the time), it's not really too much of a stretch to think that Pathfinder's market share isn't really large.  I realize that the common wisdom is that WotC is the 600 pound gorilla, but, really, we don't know how the market slices up.



I think it was Zardnaar that pointed out Paizo's profits around their peak in 2013 was around 12.7 million (growing from $4.4 million in 2009) with said RPG market being 15 million.But that includes novels, minis, and some other licences. So at it's peak, Paizo was probably half the RPG market. Now, Paizo has probably shrunk back down to a $4-8 million range, being probably a twelfth of the market. (Opposed to D&D which is likely 3/4ths.) But even if it retained 12 million a year and that number was all RPG, it'd still only be a fifth of the market.


----------



## Jester David (May 5, 2019)

darjr said:


> Paizo could have done a 5e without hitching their ride to WOTC.They just had to follow their original playbook. Take the 5e stuff released under OGL and do their own rulebook. Release pf1.0 books for a while after and then transition to their new book.Imagine a 5e pathfinder society?5e is under the OGL and has an SRD.To me the surprise move WAS pf2e. I still don’t quite understand it.



There's two big reasons for that. 

The first is they want to retain most of their audience. They're hoping a large percentage of their fans will switch from Pathfinder 1 to Pathfinder 2. And the best way to do that is by keeping Pathfinder 2 very similar to Pathfinder 1.
Which seems fairly reasonable. The audience for a potential 5.5 edition is largely theoretical. You're not marketing to your actual consumers, and hoping to sway people away from another game. Now, there probably IS a large audience of established gamers who want something that's more like 5e but has more character complexity and rules options, but the percentage and numbers are unknown, as is the number who are actually running games versus dissatisfied players who won't switch because the rest of their table is happy. You'd still be making a product and gambling that anyone would buy it. 

The second option is the big one: the staff at Paizo know eff all about 5e. 
They made some comparisons between PF1, PF2, and 5e in the playtest of PF2. And they read like someone who had glanced at the 5e rulebook two years prior and/or based all their knowledge of 5e on forum discussions on Paizo.comIt wasn't particularly accurate. Which makes sense. The staff at Paizo knows Pathfinder, but doesn't really know 5e. Time spent learning and understanding 5e would be detrimental to their actual job, which requires knowing Pathfinder and designing for that game. 
They're not the best people to make a Revised 5e, because the understanding of the game isn't there. They probably wouldn't know what to fix and what not to fix, what is required for balance, what are mistakes to be fixed. To say nothing of all those subtle rules. 


Honestly, Paizo is in a tough place right now. 5e is ridiculously predominant in the market. AND the new players coming into the hobby via streaming are heavily disinterested in the crunch-heavy play-style they've built their game around, which makes acquiring new players tricky. Which also makes it harder to employ the same methods to bring in new players.
But Paizo's own audience has massive collections of crunch that they have likely barely used. By sticking with 3.X rather than moving to 4e or 5e, most have show a preference for a funky, broken ruleset. Upgrading to something that plays similar feels like a lateral move, especially when many of the improvements (i.e. the action economy) can be slapped onto Pathfinder 1. And the cost is high: players have to give up the massive library of existing crunch; Pathfinder players stick with PF because of the options and customization, but it will be a year or two before PF2 can have an "acceptable" amount of options. 
I imagine Paizo is hoping to play a "long game". Sell enough material to keep the company afloat while their audience burns through the content they already own. And then, slowly over the next 2-3 years, let people swap to PF2 when it feels like there's enough material there.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 5, 2019)

GreyLord said:


> I personally do not feel the LFQW thing is even a FACTOR with how popular 5e has become.  If THAT was the deciding factor, 4e would have won the gambit by a long mile.
> 
> 5e is successful because it is FAR easier to general people to learn, and when new players are coming to a game, ease of use is a major factor.
> 
> ...



Sure, I was mainly concerned about the potential for PF2 to find customers moving on from 5E.

Ease of use is most important for your first game, the one that draws you into the hobby. Other issues will predominate when you're ready to look for a second game.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 5, 2019)

ShinHakkaider said:


> Paizo isn’t a minuscule operation. I want to say at this point that I think that they have more people working in house for them than the RPG dept at WOTC does. WOTC is a huge company but D&D is just one small part of that whole. And I really don’t think that there are as many people working Full Time in D&D than there are at Paizo.



You're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying Paizo is small now.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 5, 2019)

ShinHakkaider said:


> I think that their relative autonomy was/is a prime motivator here.



Yep, that's the corporate motivation I've been discussing before.

In reality every other publisher than a D&D publisher is a small-time gig.

Paizo is obviously betting they will break this cycle.

Myself, I think the only way they could stay big is by staying inside the D&D sphere. They could have made a 5E Advanced game in everything but name and attracted millions of 5E gamers. And maybe some Pathfinder fans too!

Without that, Paizo will just be another D&D clone publisher. In a long long line of small-time D&D clone publishers nobody has heard of.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 5, 2019)

Jester David said:


> I think it was Zardnaar that pointed out Paizo's profits around their peak in 2013 was around 12.7 million (growing from $4.4 million in 2009) with said RPG market being 15 million.But that includes novels, minis, and some other licences. So at it's peak, Paizo was probably half the RPG market. Now, Paizo has probably shrunk back down to a $4-8 million range, being probably a twelfth of the market. (Opposed to D&D which is likely 3/4ths.) But even if it retained 12 million a year and that number was all RPG, it'd still only be a fifth of the market.



Again: my "miniscule" characterization meant the future, not the past or even the present.


----------



## Aldarc (May 5, 2019)

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION], you seem to be sending mixed messages. On the one hand, you seem to think that Paizo missed their opportunity to make products adapted directly for 5E as is. On the other, you bemoan that Paizo is not making "5E Advanced." But I suspect that if Paizo made either then their profits would fizzle out even faster. Why would the market bother with Paizo if they did either especially when many tables do not allow 3pp materials? By producing materials for 5e, Paizo would be making themselves niche among niche rather than carving out a more unique niche for themselves.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 5, 2019)

Jester David said:


> There's two big reasons for that.
> 
> The first is they want to retain most of their audience. They're hoping a large percentage of their fans will switch from Pathfinder 1 to Pathfinder 2. And the best way to do that is by keeping Pathfinder 2 very similar to Pathfinder 1.
> Which seems fairly reasonable. The audience for a potential 5.5 edition is largely theoretical. You're not marketing to your actual consumers, and hoping to sway people away from another game. Now, there probably IS a large audience of established gamers who want something that's more like 5e but has more character complexity and rules options, but the percentage and numbers are unknown, as is the number who are actually running games versus dissatisfied players who won't switch because the rest of their table is happy. You'd still be making a product and gambling that anyone would buy it.
> ...



In the best of worlds, sure.

I fear the reality is that the market for d20 levels of cluttery and workload etc simply isn't there anymore.


----------



## robus (May 5, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> Myself, I think the only way they could stay big is by staying inside the D&D sphere. They could have made a 5E Advanced game in everything but name and attracted millions of 5E gamers. And maybe some Pathfinder fans too!




D&D with knobs on! I think we can be pretty certain that WotC are going to be very leery of doing anything that might kill the golden goose they’ve conjured in 5e. The perfect opportunity for someone to produce an “advanced” version.


----------



## robus (May 5, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION], you seem to be sending mixed messages. On the one hand, you seem to think that Paizo missed their opportunity to make products adapted directly for 5E as is. On the other, you bemoan that Paizo is not making "5E Advanced." But I suspect that if Paizo made either then their profits would fizzle out even faster. Why would the market bother with Paizo if they did either especially when many tables do not allow 3pp materials? By producing materials for 5e, Paizo would be making themselves niche among niche rather than carving out a more unique niche for themselves.




I think the capn and I see two opportunities for Paizo, the low hanging fruit is to repurpose the best of their classic material for 5e. i’m curious about a couple of their APs for example and more bestiaries are always welcome. The other, more risky one for sure, is to provide a pathway to a more crunchy game for those that want it. I would be interested in a D&D variety that didn’t focus so much on leveling and went with a talent tree approach for example.


----------



## schneeland (May 5, 2019)

robus said:


> D&D with knobs on! I think we can be pretty certain that WotC are going to be very leery of doing anything that might kill the golden goose they’ve conjured in 5e. The perfect opportunity for someone to produce an “advanced” version.




I think the main challenge will be that different people would like to have a version that's advanced in different ways - some might want more feats, others a more fine-grained skill system, still others may desire better backgrounds, and some may also wish for a more detailed modelling of fictional positioning than just advantage/disadvantage. I'm not sure that you can do one product that pleased all of these groups (if you do a very modular thing, play-testing might be very hard; and if you don't, you may put off some groups with _too_ much crunch).


----------



## robus (May 5, 2019)

schneeland said:


> I think the main challenge will be that different people would like to have a version that's advanced in different ways - some might want more feats, others a more fine-grained skill system, still others may desire better backgrounds, and some may also wish for a more detailed modelling of fictional positioning than just advantage/disadvantage. I'm not sure that you can do one product that pleased all of these groups (if you do a very modular thing, play-testing might be very hard; and if you don't, you may put off some groups with _too_ much crunch).




Agreed, it wouldn’t be easy. Some design choices would need to be made, but they are RPG designers/tweaked after all . And that’s why I’m surprised by some of the commenters here claiming that Paizo knows nothing about 5e. If I were a designer in this field I would absolutely want to study what is making 5e tick, and think about ways to make it tick better (or ways my product could be enhanced in a similar manner). We’ve definitely had lots of discussions in here about areas where we think things could be improved.


----------



## Parmandur (May 5, 2019)

Azzy said:


> To be fair, the people here say that PF2 may be DOA are saying that in reaction to the myriad PF1 edition warriors that actively denounce PF rather than any feelings of ill will to Paizo or PF2 themselves. Personally, I hope PF2 is a success—successes in this hobby are a great thing for the rest of the community. And, besides, Paizo are good people. However, you lot have an edition war on your hands just from a cursory look at the Paizo forums. I hope that war dies in a fire when PF2 is released.




I don't have an edition war axe to grind with PF, but I don't see the niche for PF2: PF1 offers a way to continue using 3E material from nearly two decades, PF2 offers a version of D&D that is not compatible with years of products, but is also complex, arcane, and difficult to get into? I never got past PC creation with the playtest (not very fun, and I love PC generation) so I can't comment too directly, but I don't see the market for this to replace jilted fans.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 5, 2019)

What does LFQW stand for?

[Goes to Google]

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards

Nope. This was not a factor for me diving into 5e. I'm not a "new" gamer, but I stopped playing with 1e and other 80s era games around 1990 when I was at college. Got back into TTRPGs with 5e. Have to say that there was not much analysis that went into my decision. Certainly not to level of studying character power progression. 

I took to 5e, which got me back into TTRPGs, mainly because of feelings.  It "felt" like D&D. It was evocative, it was easy(ier) to learn, and it was accessible (easy to find people to play with). 

If I wanted to play a heavily crunchy game, I'd get back into running miniature wargames. I was really into that in the 80s as well. But I don't have the time and there is something magical about TTRPGs that I cherish and that magic is not in the tactical combat rules. 

As for LFQW, even that I now know what you are referring do, can't say I would care.  If Wizards and squishy at low levels and god-like at high levels, that's a legitimate approach, if your campaigns even hit the high levels. Just don't make them overly complicated to play. 

As for Pathfinder, it just turned me off. Even now, when I am at the point where I have been buying an running or playing in other game systems, Pathfinder isn't attractive. I could say make it streamlined and easier, but I already have 5e. I just continue using all the 5e material I've spend so much on over the past few years. 



GreyLord said:


> I personally do not feel the LFQW thing is even a FACTOR with how popular 5e has become.  If THAT was the deciding factor, 4e would have won the gambit by a long mile.
> 
> 5e is successful because it is FAR easier to general people to learn, and when new players are coming to a game, ease of use is a major factor.
> 
> ...


----------



## Parmandur (May 5, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> What does LFQW stand for?
> 
> [Goes to Google]
> 
> ...




To be fair, the ways in which 5E fixes the LFQW "issue" are directly related to the ease of play and old time "feel" in 5E.


----------



## M.T. Black (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> I imagine Paizo is hoping to play a "long game". Sell enough material to keep the company afloat while their audience burns through the content they already own. And then, slowly over the next 2-3 years, let people swap to PF2 when it feels like there's enough material there.




I think Jester is right on the money here, and I think Paizo probably want to hold their nerve with 2e. There's possibly another factor to consider. I still hang around in OSR circles a bit, and its really striking now how *old* everyone is compared to my 5e circles, which have a big range of ages, but lots of younger folk. 

I rather suspect the PF1 audience is also an aging one, trying to keep PF1 alive is not a long-term viable strategy. Even if the PF2 core books only sell a quarter of what PF1 did, that is still a helluva lot of money, and more than they would make selling PF1 adventure paths. 

Ultimately, I think the profitable path is dual PF2/5e releases for the coming years, with the 5e products probably becoming their biggest sellers, but PF2 hanging around as Pepsi to D&D's Coke.


----------



## darjr (May 6, 2019)

I know I'm probably going to make a fool of myself. But here is a prediction.

PF2 will sell really well at first. But then tail off rapidly. Paizo will do more and more 5e stuff and eventually tail off PF2 product altogether. The computer game and their universal stuff and their licenses with the likes of WizKids will sustain them but eventually they'll have to decide to allocate work to a PF2 product or a 5e one and the 5e one will win.

I'm probably wrong.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (May 6, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> Yep, that's the corporate motivation I've been discussing before.
> 
> In reality every other publisher than a D&D publisher is a small-time gig.




Looking at a couple of newer companies and the games they publish, I see Cubicle 7 and Modiphius surpassing Paizo and other smaller publishers. Yes, some of C7's success is because of the very good sales of Adventures in Middle Earth, with it's 5E OGL rules system, but C7 is also putting our the new Warhammer FRP rules and those seem to be selling very well so far too. As for Modiphius, I do not think any of ther games are D20 or 5E-based at all, but the volume of different games they now publish, or have in the works, definitely moves them up the list. And if they keep the White Wolf Vampire 5th Ed moving forward successfully, they will only grow larger.


----------



## trancejeremy (May 6, 2019)

darjr said:


> I know I'm probably going to make a fool of myself. But here is a prediction.
> 
> PF2 will sell really well at first. But then tail off rapidly. Paizo will do more and more 5e stuff and eventually tail off PF2 product altogether. The computer game and their universal stuff and their licenses with the likes of WizKids will sustain them but eventually they'll have to decide to allocate work to a PF2 product or a 5e one and the 5e one will win.
> 
> I'm probably wrong.




In retrospect, I wonder if it would have made more sense for Paizo to make PF2 5e based, something like Adventures in Middle Earth, with Pathfinder classes added to the traditional ones. I just don't see how PF2 pleases either 3e or 5e fans, only Paizo fans, and they'd buy anything from them.


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

I don’t want to make too many predictions...
What I think will happen is marred very much by my innate bitter cynicism and my desire to see Paizo flourish. 

I think Pathfinder 2 will do okay, but not quite be as successful as PF1’s unexpected triumph. It will likely have a solid sales spike at first and then sales will trickle down over time like almost every other RPG. 
How well PF2 does might vary on the number of accessories. I think there will be too much pressure for more splat for them to go as slow as Starfinder (and they need to keep making books to justify having the staff numbers they have) but the slower the release schedule, the longer the edition will last. While a lot of people might not convert from PF1 to 2 right away, over time players might jump editions. 

I disagree with darjr about Paizo and 5e. Mostly because I think 5e is at is peak and facing its inevitable decline. There’s still many years left, but I think the number of books and accessories people need/want for 5e is shrinking. There’s less room for 3rd Party books.
There would be something deeply, deeply ironic about Paizo slowly becoming more dependant on 5e over the next five or six years only to be surprised when WotC announces 6e.


----------



## Jharet (May 6, 2019)

After waiting for years for a Kingmaker collected edition for Pathfinder, it is a bit of a slap in the face to fans to see it offered to 5E players.  Once, Mona and company announce the new Starstone Module for 5E, the message will be clearer.  So, meh.  Good for 5e players in that they can get a good adventure.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (May 6, 2019)

The RPGs have got two parts: crunch and fluff. 

Fluff has got a constante value because the lore and background can be later, for example in a adaptation for comic, novel or videogame. But many times sourcebooks of fluff are only to be read a couple of times, and now internet and wikis of videogames, series and comics offer a lot of free fluff. 

If there is too many crunch, the value is lower, and it can be created by 3rd party publishers. And players don't want to buy again the same books only to have an updated version of the crunch. And any fluff isn't ready for new crunch as new classes with a special game mechanic (for example the vestige pact magic). 

Pathfinder has future, or at least Golarion as franchise or IP, a too enough value to not be forgotten.

* I would love sourcebooks with 5th Ed D&D version of monsters, races and classes by Pathfinder, but I don't need stats for nPCs. 

* D20 system has still a failure to be the ultimate universal RPG system. I give this the name "Cobretti effect". In the movie "Cobra" Brigitte Nielsen's character was unarmed and she couldn't face night slasher, only to hide and run away like in a survival horror, but Sylvester Stallone with enough weapons could kill all the cult of the new dawn. In the modern settings with firearms the monsters or enemies are too powerful or too weak if PCs have got (enough) weapons and ammo and this needs a right adjustment of XPs reward and challenge rating value.  My suggestion is to publish a d20 Modern 2.0. with more abilities scores: Courage, Grace (karma/fate/luck), Astuteness and Des would be Agility (Reflex) and  Technique (crafting, arts, dance, pre-learnt actions, maneuvers of martial arts..).


----------



## Jharet (May 6, 2019)

Let's get one thing straight.  5e is only popular because of Stranger Things and the Critical Role folks.  The game is not pulling in new players without that exposure.  If Stranger Things pretended there was a Pathfinder in 1983, we wouldn't be talking about Pathfinder second edition at all and D and D would be on sixth edition by now.  As an old school gamer, 5e is boring, the PF2 playtest felt like a watered down version of the game I already love.  So, Pathfinder players are left in the cold and will be bitter for a while.  Ten years worth of books and steady rotation of games will have to keep me busy.


----------



## Azzy (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> After waiting for years for a Kingmaker collected edition for Pathfinder, it is a bit of a slap in the face to fans to see it offered to 5E players.




Because other gamers getting something nice is always a slap in the face. It's a bloody bestiary—the actual AP is still PF!


----------



## Azzy (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> Let's get one thing straight.  5e is only popular because of Stranger Things and the Critical Role folks.  The game is not pulling in new players without that exposure.  If Stranger Things pretended there was a Pathfinder in 1983, we wouldn't be talking about Pathfinder second edition at all and D and D would be on sixth edition by now.  As an old school gamer, 5e is boring, the PF2 playtest felt like a watered down version of the game I already love.  So, Pathfinder players are left in the cold and will be bitter for a while.  Ten years worth of books and steady rotation of games will have to keep me busy.




Sir, that is absolutely laughable. Enjoy your sour grapes.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION], you seem to be sending mixed messages. On the one hand, you seem to think that Paizo missed their opportunity to make products adapted directly for 5E as is. On the other, you bemoan that Paizo is not making "5E Advanced." But I suspect that if Paizo made either then their profits would fizzle out even faster. Why would the market bother with Paizo if they did either especially when many tables do not allow 3pp materials? By producing materials for 5e, Paizo would be making themselves niche among niche rather than carving out a more unique niche for themselves.



Thank you for allowing me to clarify. There are certainly calls for straight-up 5E material from Paizo, given their track record of adventure paths.

What I am envisioning as a Pathfinder successor game, however, is not a straight add-on to 5E. The game does not need to be directly or even closely compatible with 5E (and indeed should not be, given the litigation risks).

But is should be a game that takes 5E's lessons to heart. It should avoid giving off the impression of being a throw-back to the days of pre-5E gaming where casters were several tiers better than martials and creating high-level NPCs was an arduous task.

Once the game gets the basic sensibilities of the post-5E customer down, it can explore breaking out of all kinds of restrictions WotC has self-imposed on their game!

The idea is to thread the needle by exploiting the crunch gap left open by WotC.

If their game is too unlike 5E, PF2 suffers the overwhelming risk of becoming just another DnD clone in a long line of DnD clones. All these companies are much much smaller than Paizo wants to be, and needs to be to keep supporting Golarion with juicy adventures.

Essentially the idea is for Pathfinder 2 to hew close to 5E just as Pathfinder 1 hew close to 3E, since that's the only place with a prospect for staying relatively big.

The challenge is greater of course. After all WotC hasn't abandoned 5E the way they abandoned 3E. They have just abandoned "high-crunch 5E".

So that's where Paizo ought to position themselves.

Striking out on their own may make corporate sense ("never again depend on the whims of the 500 lb gorilla").

But this forgets that the pickings outside that gorilla's back yard are slim indeed.

Tldr What's the point of becoming a successful DnD clone publisher if that relegates Paizo to the size and heft of a successful DnD clone publisher? I mean, sure I can name half a dozen such games. But can name any company making them? No. Am I aware of any broadly accepted adventure campaign for such a game. No. Do any of them have the clout to publish path after path of renowned adventure. Please.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

schneeland said:


> I think the main challenge will be that different people would like to have a version that's advanced in different ways - some might want more feats, others a more fine-grained skill system, still others may desire better backgrounds, and some may also wish for a more detailed modelling of fictional positioning than just advantage/disadvantage. I'm not sure that you can do one product that pleased all of these groups (if you do a very modular thing, play-testing might be very hard; and if you don't, you may put off some groups with _too_ much crunch).



Yes, but being able to use the Pathfinder banner to unite them under one specific path would sure help!


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

robus said:


> And that’s why I’m surprised by some of the commenters here claiming that Paizo knows nothing about 5e. If I were a designer in this field I would absolutely want to study what is making 5e tick, and think about ways to make it tick better (or ways my product could be enhanced in a similar manner).



Yes the window where you could ignore 5E has long since closed.

In fact that summarizes my entire point.


----------



## gyor (May 6, 2019)

I hope they do unique Pathfinder races like Kytons, Divs,  Daemons,  ect...


----------



## Aldarc (May 6, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> But is should be a game that takes 5E's lessons to heart. It should avoid giving off the impression of being a throw-back to the days of pre-5E gaming where casters were several tiers better than martials and creating high-level NPCs was an arduous task.



This was really only a 3E problem as it was not shared by 4E or pre-3E. Furthermore, a lot of these lessons have already been taken to heart by the OSR market, which has arguably done a better job than 5E at providing easy pick-up-and-play games, though this also owes to influences from PbtA (e.g., playbooks). Also, like others have already said, I don't think that the bulk of 5E players are aware of or care about LFQW. 



> Once the game gets the basic sensibilities of the post-5E customer down, it can explore breaking out of all kinds of restrictions WotC has self-imposed on their game!
> 
> The idea is to thread the needle by exploiting the crunch gap left open by WotC.
> 
> If their game is too unlike 5E, PF2 suffers the overwhelming risk of becoming just another DnD clone in a long line of DnD clones. All these companies are much much smaller than Paizo wants to be, and needs to be to keep supporting Golarion with juicy adventures.



Conversely, if PF2 is too similar to 5E, then why should gamers bother with it either? Because it would remain substantially easier for gamers to stay with playing proper 5E alongside their friends than abandoning ship to play a "5E Heartbreaker." Even as large as 5E is, I don't think that the 5E crunch gap is particularly wide enough for Paizo to establish itself as a company. I think that you overestimate the demand for what you want from "High Crunch 5E." 

This was the problem that many MMO developers faced when creating MMOs to compete against World of Warcraft. Many MMOs were creating WoW-esque MMOs only to discover that most people were sticking with WoW. Why? Because that was what everyone else was playing and these other games were not different enough to warrant playing these other games for prolonged periods. Including WoW most people nowadays speak of the "Big 4" MMOs (i.e., World of Warcraft, Final Fantasy 14, Guild Wars 2, and Elder Scrolls Online). Excluding WoW, each have enough significant differences from WoW that have warranted their respective fanbases. 



> Essentially the idea is for Pathfinder 2 to hew close to 5E just as Pathfinder 1 hew close to 3E, since that's the only place with a prospect for staying relatively big.
> 
> The challenge is greater of course. After all WotC hasn't abandoned 5E the way they abandoned 3E. They have just abandoned "high-crunch 5E".
> 
> So that's where Paizo ought to position themselves.



I am uncertain whether Paizo can position themselves there. My understanding is that the 5E OGL is not as open source as the d20 OGL.


----------



## Jharet (May 6, 2019)

Azzy said:


> Because other gamers getting something nice is always a slap in the face. It's a bloody bestiary—the actual AP is still PF!




Yes.  The AP has been out of print.  Pathfinder players actually want to play it. Not everyone likes to use PDfs and would like a collected edition of something out of print.  Shouldn't be that hard for you to understand.


----------



## Jharet (May 6, 2019)

Azzy said:


> Sir, that is absolutely laughable. Enjoy your sour grapes.




Glad I could spread some pearls before sow.


----------



## Azzy (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> Yes.  The AP has been out of print.  Pathfinder players actually want to play it. Not everyone likes to use PDfs and would like a collected edition of something out of print.  Shouldn't be that hard for you to understand.



PF players WILL be able to play it. If you're so fussed about it being PF2 instead of PF1, I hate to break it to you but it makes no sense to support the defunct edition when you're rolling out a new edition. Sorry, just reality. Taking it personally isn't going to hellp you. Taking umbrage that the 5e community is getting a bestiary that they'll have to buy on top of the collectors edition isnn't going to win you any sympathy. And considering a support product for a different system as a slap in the face is just childish.

But, hey, you do have those pdfs for PF1—even if you don't like to use, they're still there. You just choose not to use them. But, hey, you can just use them for the moster and NPC stats while running the hardback adventure—you'll be on the same footing as 5e players with the bestiary.


----------



## Jharet (May 6, 2019)

Thanks for trying to provoke me.  I don't have a problem with 5e or the community. It just doesn't interest me, nor the revisionist history surrounding its recent rise in popularity.  Glad I could enlighten your days.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> This was really only a 3E problem as it was not shared by 4E or pre-3E.



Not commenting on the pre or post 3E problem; just making sure we're both including Pathfinder (1) in the group of games with the "3E problem", yeah?


----------



## S'mon (May 6, 2019)

Thinking about this - I have Kingmaker 1-3 & 5 (since I heard #4 is not great and #5 seems a better capstone than #6) but would never run them in 5e. And realistically I WILL buy this 5e Kingmaker hardback, assuming it has that great Paizo art, to help me do what I was always going to do one day - run KM in 5e.

I don't really understand how they can fill even one hardback with AP stat blocks, but I'm really curious to find out!


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> Furthermore, a lot of these lessons have already been taken to heart by the OSR market



Sorry I don't understand why bringing up this (or that 4E has solved a particular problem) is relevant. 

The game that matters is 5E. And, just possibly if Paizo plays their cards right, Pathfinder 2.



> Also, like others have already said, I don't think that the bulk of 5E players are aware of or care about LFQW.



This is not the argument you think it is.

(Of course they don't, they're playing a game where it is fixed!

If they were to switch to 3.5 say they would very much become very aware and start to care very quickly!)


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> Conversely, if PF2 is too similar to 5E, then why should gamers bother with it either? Because it would remain substantially easier for gamers to stay with playing proper 5E alongside their friends than abandoning ship to play a "5E Heartbreaker." Even as large as 5E is, I don't think that the 5E crunch gap is particularly wide enough for Paizo to establish itself as a company. I think that you overestimate the demand for what you want from "High Crunch 5E."



What do you consider is Pathfinder 2s niche then? They aren't making the game because people need to play a game named Pathfinder after all...

What I'm wondering is if you see a larger niche elsewhere? (If you don't, meaning Paizo is doomed regardless that's fair enough)

I'm not saying PF2 should or need to be too similar to 5E. I'm saying 5E brings certain concepts to the table that PF2 would do well to not go back on.


----------



## SkidAce (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> Let's get one thing straight.  5e is only popular because of Stranger Things and the Critical Role folks.  The game is not pulling in new players without that exposure.  If Stranger Things pretended there was a Pathfinder in 1983, we wouldn't be talking about Pathfinder second edition at all and D and D would be on sixth edition by now.  As an old school gamer, 5e is boring, the PF2 playtest felt like a watered down version of the game I already love.  So, Pathfinder players are left in the cold and will be bitter for a while.  Ten years worth of books and steady rotation of games will have to keep me busy.




Simply put, I do not agree.

5E is popular with my group because it has the appeal of older styles, but has modernized the rule set with simple and elegant rules.


----------



## kenmarable (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> After waiting for years for a Kingmaker collected edition for Pathfinder, it is a bit of a slap in the face to fans to see it offered to 5E players.  Once, Mona and company announce the new Starstone Module for 5E, the message will be clearer.  So, meh.  Good for 5e players in that they can get a good adventure.




Psst... they are making a Kingmaker collected edition for Pathfinder.

They are not making a Kingmaker collected edition for 5e. Just a bestiary.

You face might feel a little less slapped if you actually read their announcement.


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> Yes.  The AP has been out of print.  Pathfinder players actually want to play it. Not everyone likes to use PDfs and would like a collected edition of something out of print.  Shouldn't be that hard for you to understand.



If the only thing stopping you from running an AP is having a physical copy, send the PDFs to a print shop. Get a black-and-White coil bound copy that you can use AND WRITE ON. Hilight, not notes, reference page numbers, etc.


----------



## oreofox (May 6, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> I am uncertain whether Paizo can position themselves there. My understanding is that the 5E OGL is not as open source as the d20 OGL.



  The 5e OGL is the exact same as the one Paizo uses for Pathfinder. What is included in the SRD, however, is much more restricted compared to the 3e SRD. Each class only has a single subclass, each race only has a single subrace, there's only 1 background, and I think only a single feat? I could be wrong on the feat, though. Don't feel like looking it up. I also believe the named spells are completely left out, instead of just the name part of the spell.  It's rather smart on WotC's part to highly restrict the SRD so when the inevitable 6e comes out, and people rage at how bad it is, another company can't swoop in and take everything 5e, make a few changes, and create a competing game that surpasses WotC's own D&D edition (similar to Pathfinder surpassing 4e with an "outdated" edition). Though, sucks for fans of 5e who can't have a new Pathfinder-like edition that takes everything 5e, makes a few changes, and competes with and surpasses 6e. That is, of course, if 6e ends up being a new 4e in reception.


----------



## Hussar (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> /snip
> 
> I disagree with darjr about Paizo and 5e. Mostly because I think 5e is at is peak and facing its inevitable decline. There’s still many years left, but I think the number of books and accessories people need/want for 5e is shrinking. There’s less room for 3rd Party books.
> There would be something deeply, deeply ironic about Paizo slowly becoming more dependant on 5e over the next five or six years only to be surprised when WotC announces 6e.




What evidence do you see that 5e has "peaked"?  By all accounts, 5e is still growing at a very, very healthy rate.  While I agree that 5e has to peak sometime, I'm not sure that that sometime is "now".


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> After waiting for years for a Kingmaker collected edition for Pathfinder, it is a bit of a slap in the face to fans to see it offered to 5E players.  Once, Mona and company announce the new Starstone Module for 5E, the message will be clearer.  So, meh.  Good for 5e players in that they can get a good adventure.



???
Did you read the presss release? The collected edition _*IS*_ Pathfinder. Just Pathfinder 2. (Because it’s coming out a year after PF2’s launch.)

The 5e component isn’t the AP, just a Bestiary for conversion. So players can take the NPCs and monsters in that book and convert the rest of the AP. It’s likely going to be a smallish book.



Jharet said:


> Thanks for trying to provoke me.  I don't have a problem with 5e or the community. It just doesn't interest me, nor the revisionist history surrounding its recent rise in popularity.  Glad I could enlighten your days.



5e was released in 2014 and was an instant hit, being an immediate best seller that was rivaling 4e and 3e by late 2015.
Critical Role started in 2015 but likely wasn’t a “hit” until 2016-17. 
Stranger Things was released at the end of 2016. 

Whose history is revisionist?


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

Hussar said:


> What evidence do you see that 5e has "peaked"?  By all accounts, 5e is still growing at a very, very healthy rate.  While I agree that 5e has to peak sometime, I'm not sure that that sometime is "now".



Gut feeling.
Personal anecdotal evidence.
I think people are reaching saturation. I need maybe one good monster book. I think one more subclass book is needed. Maybe the psion. And I have more adventures that I need. After that, there’s little they can publish to improvise my game. 
Meanwhile, I think most of the people who would play and are interested and been exposed already. New player acquisition is going to slow down. 

Plus, 2017 was a huge year and 2018 was even better. Can 2019 be even better? Or just the same as things plateau?

If 2018 was the peak, then 2019 will be close to what 2017 was. And 2017 was a huge year. And since 2014 was a string year too, 2022 will still be decent sales. And the game could go to 2024 before they really need to have a new edition. 
And that’s assuming the decline is as sharp as the rise. It will likely be slower.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

oreofox said:


> The 5e OGL is the exact same as the one Paizo uses for Pathfinder. What is included in the SRD, however, is much more restricted compared to the 3e SRD.



But is that a problem if your goal isn't to make material specifically compatible with 5E?

The PF2 I envision might lose specific 5Eisms like advantage (since it needs a more gradual bonus system to support more fine-grained crunch).

I would have thought Paizo would just use whatever PF1 was based on.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> ???
> Did you read the presss release? The collected edition _*IS*_ Pathfinder. Just Pathfinder 2.



Those are two different games incompatible with each other. Getting PF2 material is of zero help if you need PF1 material.


----------



## Hussar (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> Thanks for trying to provoke me.  I don't have a problem with 5e or the community. It just doesn't interest me, nor the revisionist history surrounding its recent rise in popularity.  Glad I could enlighten your days.




Umm, revisionist?  Stranger things came out two years AFTER the release of 5e.  At a point where 5e was already rocketing up the ranks of best selling edition.  If Stranger Things and online streaming was a critical part of the popularity of 5e, how do you explain 5e's popularity _before_ those things were released?


----------



## Hussar (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> Gut feeling.
> Personal anecdotal evidence.
> I think people are reaching saturation. I need maybe one good monster book. I think one more subclass book is needed. Maybe the psion. And I have more adventures that I need. After that, there’s little they can publish to improvise my game.
> Meanwhile, I think most of the people who would play and are interested and been exposed already. New player acquisition is going to slow down.
> ...




Fair enough.  My gut tells me all sorts of things.  Stupid gut.   

Let's say you're right and 2019 is the plateau year, but, the decline is half the speed of the rise.  Not terribly unreasonable I think, since there's been no sign whatsoever that sales of core books have slacked off at all.  The core three are all still about the same place on the Amazon sales lists that they've been for a few years now.  

That means that we'd be hitting new edition territory ten years from now.  That's a pretty healthy horse to hitch a wagon to in the gaming industry.  

And, if Paizo plays its cards right, it could hoover up those that don't want to switch to a new edition same as it did from 3e to 4e.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> Yes.  The AP has been out of print.  Pathfinder players actually want to play it. Not everyone likes to use PDfs and would like a collected edition of something out of print.  Shouldn't be that hard for you to understand.




This AP has gone out of print RECENTLY. As within the last year or so. 

It originally came out in...wait for it...2010. 

It's NINE years old. Even if some of the books went out of print last year youre still looking at it being around for EIGHT YEARS. 
I could excuse people OUTSIDE of Pathfinder not knowing or not hearing about it. But Pathfinder fans KNEW of the exisitance of this AP for at this point ALMOST A DECADE. 

There's literally no excuse for someone who actually wanted to run or play this NOT to have gotten the books when they were readily available. 

And if you REALLY just want to run the adventure? Get the PDF's, have them printed out and spiral bound. DONE. Now you have a usable compliation of all of the adventures. Hell if you have Adobe Acrobat you can move some things around and have the adventure compilation as one book, relevant campaign backmatter info as another book and a compiled Bestiary as another.


----------



## kenmarable (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> Gut feeling.
> Personal anecdotal evidence.
> I think people are reaching saturation. I need maybe one good monster book. I think one more subclass book is needed. Maybe the psion. And I have more adventures that I need. After that, there’s little they can publish to improvise my game.
> Meanwhile, I think most of the people who would play and are interested and been exposed already. New player acquisition is going to slow down.
> ...




My personal anecdotal evidence is that new player acquisition is still increasing. I am actually at the point where there's more groups available to me than I have time for! And I'm hearing from plenty of others in the community that they keep finding new people to recruit who are becoming regular gamers. Colleges and high schools are constantly growing, many starting to have official clubs - and there's always fresh bodies every year there. Within the Critical Role fandom alone I have lost track of the number of tweets and posts I see pretty much daily saying "I only started playing a few months ago, and tonight is my first time DMing! Wish me luck!" Every week or two I see someone excited for their first game with their kids, or who haven't played since AD&D and are getting back into it now. 

Anecdotally, I have seen zero evidence that player acquisition has slowed at all and plenty of evidence to the contrary. That's the problem with anecdotal evidence - it's far too limited to be able to draw any general conclusions. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Plus, others in my groups and myself still waiting for WotC to start producing the books we are most interested in. Only recently have they started moving beyond the safe, classic stuff and into the more interesting portion of the edition, in our opinions. And one thing I have noticed in a lot of the new players is that they seem to gravitate far more towards the non-traditional stuff than I have seen in any past edition. Far fewer Tolkein and Drizzt inspired-fantasy and more "Here's my tiefling archfey warlock baker who travels the world looking for the best cupcake ingredients with their pseudodragon familiar who's such a good boi!" 

It is definitely an interesting time for D&D right now, and I can easily see it keep growing, especially if it at least partially caters to the less traditional fantasy and more quirky young crowd.


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

ShinHakkaider said:


> This AP has gone out of print RECENTLY. As within the last year or so.
> 
> It originally came out in...wait for it...2010.




Gonna nitpick here. The first volumes of the AP went out of print in 2013. I snatched up one of the last few copies of the AP back then. It and _Skull & Shackle_s were the APs that went OOP surprisingly fast, and have been high on the fan speculation as being future reprints since. 
But the later volumes (which always sell more slowly) might have just recently sold out...


----------



## ShinHakkaider (May 6, 2019)

Hussar said:


> Umm, revisionist?  Stranger things came out two years AFTER the release of 5e.  At a point where 5e was already rocketing up the ranks of best selling edition.  If Stranger Things and online streaming was a critical part of the popularity of 5e, how do you explain 5e's popularity _before_ those things were released?




The thing is, while I disagree with that d00d on more than a few things? I dont think that he's entirely WRONG about this part. 

5E WAS popular within the TTRPG community in those two years. As an alternative to both 4E and the crunchier games like Pathfinder. People who abandoned D&D during 4E returned to play this easier, simpler game. 

But OUTSIDE of the TTRPG community is where STRANGER THINGS and CRITICAL ROLE were most influential and drew in people who were unaware that TTRPG's were still a thing. Even better, with CRITICAL ROLE they were able to actually SEE what a TTRPG WAS or HOW IT COULD BE. It's one thing to explain to a person who is completely unfamiliar with RPG's how the game is played. But when they are able to go on youtube and watch an episode and have it click with them and then maybe even have them go "Well I want to play or run a game like THAT." That is what I think boosted the popularity of D&D 5E into the stratisphere. 

I knew that 5E was popular when around a year or two ago I was in Midtown Comics in Times Square and overheard not one but TWO different groups of people talking about their D&D groups in relation to CRITICAL ROLE.

Hell the only reason I have the 5E core books is because of CRITICAL ROLE. I'm a pretty dedicated Pathfinder GM but I had to pickup the books becasue I wanted to know the rules. .


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

Hussar said:


> Fair enough.  My gut tells me all sorts of things.  Stupid gut.
> 
> Let's say you're right and 2019 is the plateau year, but, the decline is half the speed of the rise.  Not terribly unreasonable I think, since there's been no sign whatsoever that sales of core books have slacked off at all.  The core three are all still about the same place on the Amazon sales lists that they've been for a few years now.
> 
> ...



That seems reasonable. 
But as the game starts its slow wind down, the first products to see the effects will be 3rd Party stuff, as people will still be more likely to buy official books. 

But, yeah, there's still money to be made and books to sell for many years. I'm not worried about a new edition any time soon. Heck, before replying I was just touching base with a 3rd Party publisher to edit a book that has a successful Kickstarter that made tens of thousands. So 3PP aren't in danger any time soon. 



kenmarable said:


> My personal anecdotal evidence is that new player acquisition is still increasing. I am actually at the point where there's more groups available to me than I have time for! And I'm hearing from plenty of others in the community that they keep finding new people to recruit who are becoming regular gamers. Colleges and high schools are constantly growing, many starting to have official clubs - and there's always fresh bodies every year there. Within the Critical Role fandom alone I have lost track of the number of tweets and posts I see pretty much daily saying "I only started playing a few months ago, and tonight is my first time DMing! Wish me luck!" Every week or two I see someone excited for their first game with their kids, or who haven't played since AD&D and are getting back into it now.
> 
> Anecdotally, I have seen zero evidence that player acquisition has slowed at all and plenty of evidence to the contrary. That's the problem with anecdotal evidence - it's far too limited to be able to draw any general conclusions. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



There's always going to be new players. It's never going to stop entirely. 
Keep in mind that there was an efftonne of new players in 2017 and 2018. So even if new player acquisition ramped right down... there'd still be a LOT of new players coming in.

It could have peaked last year. Or it could peak this year or next. But it feels like they should run out of the massive wave of newcomers sooner or later. There's only so many geek aligned people who don't already play in the world...


----------



## Aldarc (May 6, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> Not commenting on the pre or post 3E problem; just making sure we're both including Pathfinder (1) in the group of games with the "3E problem", yeah?



Yes, though the degree to which it is a "problem" varies from person to person and group to group. Some people have voiced support for the 3E style of NPC generation because it contributes to their sense of simulationism since it means that NPCs and PCs are using the same rules. I am not suggesting that this is a majority opinion, but I do think that you need to be aware that your assessments are not universally held. The success of 5e has far more going for it than a reductionism of GM prep time and "fixing" LFQW. 



CapnZapp said:


> Sorry I don't understand why bringing up this (or that 4E has solved a particular problem) is relevant.
> 
> The game that matters is 5E. And, just possibly if Paizo plays their cards right, Pathfinder 2.



5E is not necessarily the golden child for "lessons learned" from 3E (or past editions) or the only source of inspiration that should matter to Paizo, because IMHO some D&D inspired games perform better in certain areas at what 5E claims to do. Some OSR games, for example, have far less GM prep work required than 5E. So if average GM prep time is important, should I be learning from 5E or instead from some other system that has lower prep time than 5E? 

This is one of my priniciple problems. Yes, I understand that 5e is the 800 lb. gorilla, but that does not mean that we should presume that just because 5E does a thing that others must do likewise or that 5e does it best. 



> This is not the argument you think it is.
> 
> (Of course they don't, they're playing a game where it is fixed!
> 
> If they were to switch to 3.5 say they would very much become very aware and start to care very quickly!)



And this is far less of an argument than you think it is since you are fundamentally begging the question. Having played PF1 and 3E along with the same groups playing 5E, I can safely say that not everyone (or even most) cares about LFQW the way that most people who visit this forum might and even less than those who post on this forum might. Forums tend to amplify issues. And your reasoning presumes that the issue is "fixed" just because you find its solution satisfying. Consider alternatively that Starfinder also lessened LFQW by reducing spells to a max of 6th level (and mundanes with wonderous technology) but it does not have the concentration rule you find satisfying from 5E. 



CapnZapp said:


> What do you consider is Pathfinder 2s niche then? They aren't making the game because people need to play a game named Pathfinder after all...
> 
> What I'm wondering is if you see a larger niche elsewhere? (If you don't, meaning Paizo is doomed regardless that's fair enough)
> 
> I'm not saying PF2 should or need to be too similar to 5E. I'm saying 5E brings certain concepts to the table that PF2 would do well to not go back on.



I would consider looking at statements made by Paizo, including this one made by Jason Bulmahn in another thread about a similar subject: 


Jason Bulmahn said:


> we looked to our core strengths as a game engine when making the final version of 2nd ed, while also trying to smooth out the rough spots. We want to make sure that you can use 2nd to tell the same stories that we told in 1st, but we want a game that is smoother to run and easier to learn. A lot of that comes from finding better ways to manage characters (smoother, intuitive leveling) and lightening the load on GMs (easy monster and NPC design, robust encounter building tools), but we also wanted to make sure that the game has a deep amount of customization. Some of this came to light in the playtest, but it did not get the level of polish I wanted until the final version. I am very happy with where we are right now.


----------



## jayoungr (May 6, 2019)

ShinHakkaider said:


> Anyway I can see how Paizo supporting 5E instead of continuing to support 1E is seen as a betrayal of sorts.




It shouldn't be.  I mean, look at Troll Lord Games--they produce adventures and setting books for both D&D 5E and their own Castles and Crusades game.  With PDF and POD, the only real sunk cost is the time and effort to produce the two versions; it's not like they have to commit to a set print run for either product.


----------



## billd91 (May 6, 2019)

Jharet said:


> After waiting for years for a Kingmaker collected edition for Pathfinder, it is a bit of a slap in the face to fans to see it offered to 5E players.




Here's an example of the voice of entitlement. You are not entitled to a collected edition of Kingmaker because you have supported PF and Paizo. The property is theirs to use as they see fit - and if that use is to promote their second edition of PF and draw in some sales from 5e players, more power to them. I hope they're wildly successful. I know I'm going to check it out for 2 reasons - 1) I'm a long time gamer who feels 5e comes closest to the D&D I prefer and would love to have KM resources for it, and 2) because I'm curious about 2e but a little wary and this might be a good way to develop my connection to it.


----------



## epithet (May 6, 2019)

Paizo just wants to sell books, I don't think it matters too much which of their books they're selling. Their books fall into 3 broad categories: system, setting, and adventure. The market for the system books (Pathfinder 1 & 2) is somewhat limited, while the market for the setting and adventure books is potentially as large as the D&D market.

Pathfinder's Golarion is, in my opinion, a much better setting than the Forgotten Realms. The adventures published for the setting seem to be at least as good as the stuff coming out for D&D, and I've seen plenty of comments suggesting they're quite a bit better. It seems like a no-brainer, to me, for Paizo to publish a 5e Golarion setting book with some new races, classes, and monsters, followed by 5e versions of their most popular adventure paths. Hell, they can even Kickstart it.

Going forward, if their 5e stuff sells well (which I can't imagine it wouldn't) it makes sense for future adventures to be published for PF and 5e, both. Even if the 5e version sells 4 times as many copies, they need to keep supporting the PF game system for the inevitable day when interest in D&D starts to slack off again. This is apparently the conclusion that Monte Cook Games came to, because they recently Kickstarted the Arcana of the Ancients, which is a bid to repackage Numenera material for the 5e crowd. That campaign got half a million dollars for books that, for the most part, re-work existing material to appeal to a larger audience.

The simple reality of the RPG market seems to be that D&D is the center around which the hobby orbits. Whether its a sun that radiates life to its satellites or a black hole that gobbles up everything else is debatable, but for now it seems like the best strategy might be to tuck in as the remora to the D&D shark, or the egret to the D&D buffalo. If Paizo can get a significant number of D&D players to run campaigns in Golarion, becoming familiar with the world and pantheon and considering it their setting of choice, then Paizo wins, regardless of what system those campaigns are using.


----------



## billd91 (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> Gonna nitpick here. The first volumes of the AP went out of print in 2013. I snatched up one of the last few copies of the AP back then. It and _Skull & Shackle_s were the APs that went OOP surprisingly fast, and have been high on the fan speculation as being future reprints since.
> But the later volumes (which always sell more slowly) might have just recently sold out...




That assumes they were actually reprinted - but Paizo generally doesn't reprint their APs. They may have been *out of stock* by then, though. Does anybody know for sure whether Kingmaker actually got reprinted?


----------



## kenmarable (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> There's always going to be new players. It's never going to stop entirely.
> Keep in mind that there was an efftonne of new players in 2017 and 2018. So even if new player acquisition ramped right down... there'd still be a LOT of new players coming in.
> 
> It could have peaked last year. Or it could peak this year or next. But it feels like they should run out of the massive wave of newcomers sooner or later. There's only so many geek aligned people who don't already play in the world...




Well, obviously it's going to peak sometime, there's only so many human beings.  But "geek aligned" is now mainstream pop culture. A movie about freaking *Thanos and the Infinity Stones* of all things just made $2 billion in a couple weeks.

Also, if we are discussing anecdotal evidence, the past 6 months I have seen more new players than in the 6 months before that which was more than the 6 months before that, and so on. I expect the next 6 months to have more new players than the past 6 months. Sure, there were a ridiculous number of new players in 2017 and 2018, but from what I have seen, new player acquisition is still accelerating, not peaking or slowing down at all. So there may very well be an even ridculouser number of new players in 2019, and possibly even 2020.

So *my* gut feeling is that 5e has quite a ways to go before it peaks. 

But either way, it's just our gut feelings and anecdotal evidence pointing in opposite directions. Neither of which is any actual evidence of the reality of the situation.


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

billd91 said:


> That assumes they were actually reprinted - but Paizo generally doesn't reprint their APs. They may have been *out of stock* by then, though. Does anybody know for sure whether Kingmaker actually got reprinted?




By "reprint" I mean "hardcover collection & revision". No AP was simply reprinted.


----------



## Jester David (May 6, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> Well, obviously it's going to peak sometime, there's only so many human beings.  But "geek aligned" is now mainstream pop culture. A movie about freaking *Thanos and the Infinity Stones* of all things just made $2 billion in a couple weeks.
> 
> Also, if we are discussing anecdotal evidence, the past 6 months I have seen more new players than in the 6 months before that which was more than the 6 months before that, and so on. I expect the next 6 months to have more new players than the past 6 months. Sure, there were a ridiculous number of new players in 2017 and 2018, but from what I have seen, new player acquisition is still accelerating, not peaking or slowing down at all. So there may very well be an even ridculouser number of new players in 2019, and possibly even 2020.
> 
> ...




Sure. But after two seasons of _Stranger Things_ and the appearances on _Big Bang Theory_ plus the phenomena that is _Critical Role_ over the last two years... where are all these nerds that want to play D&D but haven't started yet? 

I'd hesitate to call this a "guess" even. Because it does feel like just a vague prediction. I wouldn't even bet a single cent that I was right. (Well... a few cents maybe. Nothing more than a dime. Maybe a buck.)
I just think we're at or near "peak D&D" and should expect it to flatten in growth. 

Also... do we really _want_ it to get much bigger? It already feels like the D&D team is losing some of the approachability they've had the last few years. And the big conventions like GenCon are becoming harder to gain access to.


----------



## robus (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> Sure. But after two seasons of _Stranger Things_ and the appearances on _Big Bang Theory_ plus the phenomena that is _Critical Role_ over the last two years... where are all these nerds that want to play D&D but haven't started yet?




Despite claims to the contrary, if you're not inside the D&D world but are curious it's actually quite hard to find a group of people to play with. So there could be a large number of people still lurking, waiting for a game to arise. And, no, the FLGS is not an appealing resource to many people.


----------



## kenmarable (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> ...where are all these nerds that want to play D&D but haven't started yet?




That's one of the issues right there. You keep wondering where are all the geeks and nerds who aren't playing, but the reality is that it's not just geeks & nerds who are playing anymore (or, more likely, there are so many nerds now that the definition is approaching meaningless). D&D is not just for nerds.


----------



## MechaTarrasque (May 6, 2019)

If 5e is starting to slow down, they certainly timed it right, being 2 years out from the movie (and possibly 6e).  By the time "5e is in trouble" becomes accepted, it will be drowned out by other things.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> Gonna nitpick here. The first volumes of the AP went out of print in 2013. I snatched up one of the last few copies of the AP back then. It and _Skull & Shackle_s were the APs that went OOP surprisingly fast, and have been high on the fan speculation as being future reprints since.
> But the later volumes (which always sell more slowly) might have just recently sold out...




I stand corrected. Paizo usually lists sales for thier product that they are running out of and during the most recent of those (which was sometime last year I think) I noticed copies of the Kingmaker AP on that sale list. Those probably WERE some of the later volumes as opposed to the earlier ones.


----------



## Wrathamon (May 6, 2019)

Maybe Critical Role got the bump because 5e was so successful and they were able to attract a big audience because of D&D being back. 

In return, their success helps extend its dominance.


----------



## S'mon (May 6, 2019)

Jester David said:


> Sure. But after two seasons of _Stranger Things_ and the appearances on _Big Bang Theory_ plus the phenomena that is _Critical Role_ over the last two years... where are all these




From what I see on the D&D UK Facebook group there's still a TON of people who want to play but have no group and not much idea how to get started. The rate of newbie arrival seems to be 
increasing if anything. It's almost like the early-80s fad except it's 16-20 year olds not 10-14 
year olds, and 50% female not 90% male.


----------



## Mistwell (May 6, 2019)

We can debate if Critical Role was a major reason for 5e's success, but I think it's pretty absurd to argue Stranger Things caused the popularity of 5e. The first D&D episode of Stranger Things was too far into 5e's existing success to credit Stranger Things with the success.


----------



## Parmandur (May 6, 2019)

ShinHakkaider said:


> The thing is, while I disagree with that d00d on more than a few things? I dont think that he's entirely WRONG about this part.
> 
> 5E WAS popular within the TTRPG community in those two years. As an alternative to both 4E and the crunchier games like Pathfinder. People who abandoned D&D during 4E returned to play this easier, simpler game.
> 
> ...




That's not accurate: before Stranger Things happened, or Critical Role became big, 5E had already outsold 3E, 3.5 and 4E COMBINED. And then the growth accelerated, sure.


----------



## Hussar (May 6, 2019)

jayoungr said:


> It shouldn't be.  I mean, look at Troll Lord Games--they produce adventures and setting books for both D&D 5E and their own Castles and Crusades game.  With PDF and POD, the only real sunk cost is the time and effort to produce the two versions; it's not like they have to commit to a set print run for either product.




There is another issue there though.  Troll Lord Games didn't really brand itself as "The alternative to WotC".  Paizo, or at least some of Paizo's loudest supporters anyway, tout Paizo as the "anti-WotC", and have spent considerable time and effort trying to show that Paizo is daring to be different.

If Paizo then turns around and starts supporting 5e, suddenly that whole brand identity gets called into question.  Folks that spent years vilifying WotC aren't suddenly going to start singing hosannas to WotC.  They are very much going to see any 5e and WotC connections as an insult.


----------



## Staffan (May 6, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> We can debate if Critical Role was a major reason for 5e's success, but I think it's pretty absurd to argue Stranger Things caused the popularity of 5e. The first D&D episode of Stranger Things was too far into 5e's existing success to credit Stranger Things with the success.




Stranger Things certainly *helped*, though. If nothing else, by bringing awareness of the game to a more mainstream audience, and showing it in a positive light.

Now, that probably wouldn't have done much if 5e wasn't a damn good game to begin with, but I find it hard to believe that Stranger Things wasn't more than a blip on the radar.


----------



## darjr (May 6, 2019)

Aldarc said:


> This was really only a 3E problem as it was not shared by 4E or pre-3E. Furthermore, a lot of these lessons have already been taken to heart by the OSR market, which has arguably done a better job than 5E at providing easy pick-up-and-play games, though this also owes to influences from PbtA (e.g., playbooks). Also, like others have already said, I don't think that the bulk of 5E players are aware of or care about LFQW.
> 
> Conversely, if PF2 is too similar to 5E, then why should gamers bother with it either? Because it would remain substantially easier for gamers to stay with playing proper 5E alongside their friends than abandoning ship to play a "5E Heartbreaker." Even as large as 5E is, I don't think that the 5E crunch gap is particularly wide enough for Paizo to establish itself as a company. I think that you overestimate the demand for what you want from "High Crunch 5E."
> 
> ...





It is the exact same license.


----------



## darjr (May 6, 2019)

As for new players I bet I could run a new game for new players around here every day for months. 

My boss and others at work have strongly hinted I should run over lunch.


----------



## Parmandur (May 6, 2019)

Staffan said:


> Stranger Things certainly *helped*, though. If nothing else, by bringing awareness of the game to a more mainstream audience, and showing it in a positive light.
> 
> Now, that probably wouldn't have done much if 5e wasn't a damn good game to begin with, but I find it hard to believe that Stranger Things wasn't more than a blip on the radar.




Certainly helped, but 5E was already the bestseller by that time


----------



## Mistwell (May 6, 2019)

Staffan said:


> Stranger Things certainly *helped*, though. If nothing else, by bringing awareness of the game to a more mainstream audience, and showing it in a positive light.
> 
> Now, that probably wouldn't have done much if 5e wasn't a damn good game to begin with, but I find it hard to believe that Stranger Things wasn't more than a blip on the radar.




I am sure it helped somewhat since the episodes started to air, but given D&D 5e had already been out for more than 2 years prior to the first D&D episode of Stranger Things, and was CRUSHING IT in all sales indicators (Amazon, Barnes and Noble, NYT Best Seller list, online platforms games played, ICv2 rankings of game store sales, Hasbro CEO official financial report mention, statement from WOTC 5e designers it had sold more than 3e and 4 combined, number of core book reprints including a couple reprints issued suddenly as store stocks went unexpectedly dry, etc..) before that first D&D episode of Stranger Things, I think it's just patently false to claim that Stranger Things is the reason 5e *became *popular. Which is what   [MENTION=83630]Jharet[/MENTION] appeared to be arguing when he said, "Let's get one thing straight. 5e is only popular because of Stranger Things and the Critical Role folks." 

Mind you, this is also the same guy who said he'd never seen Critical Role but his players had and they told him his game is better than Critical Roles game. So I guess if Pathfinder isn't as popular as 5e, and 5e is only popular because of Critical Role, then he only has himself to blame for Pathfinder not being as popular as 5e since he should have been broadcasting his games online and becoming a millionaire by now while boosting Pathfinder beyond 5e in sales (despite Critical Role having started as Pathfinder and abandoning Pathfinder because it didn't translate well to an audience).


----------



## Mercador (May 7, 2019)

I think 5E is popular because "being different" is now popular. Nowadays, everything out of the norm is touted, being geek is cool, etc. It could have been the 4E or the 9E, it doesn't really matters, it's quite the age we're living in.

As for PF2E, I still don't get it, you split your smaller playerbase (smaller than 5E obviously) and with the not-really-succesful Starfinder, I wouldn't be really optimistic. I guess I might still buy it, but as a longtime devotee of the PF1E, I didn't even buy the PF2E beta and, right now, I don't plan to buy the PS2E official release either. However, I did buy the 5E core rules giftset last fall (haven't read it yet though).


----------



## Parmandur (May 7, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I think 5E is popular because "being different" is now popular. Nowadays, everything out of the norm is touted, being geek is cool, etc. It could have been the 4E or the 9E, it doesn't really matters, it's quite the age we're living in.
> 
> As for PF2E, I still don't get it, you split your smaller playerbase (smaller than 5E obviously) and with the not-really-succesful Starfinder, I wouldn't be really optimistic. I guess I might still buy it, but as a longtime devotee of the PF1E, I didn't even buy the PF2E beta and, right now, I don't plan to buy the PS2E official release either. However, I did buy the 5E core rules giftset last fall (haven't read it yet though).




I'm given to understand that Starfinder is fairly successful?


----------



## Azzy (May 7, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I think 5E is popular because "being different" is now popular. Nowadays, everything out of the norm is touted, being geek is cool, etc.




Eh, I don't see that. It's not that "being different" is popular (any more than it's ever been given the history of counter culture), it's that geekish delights have just become mainstream—it's like in the 90s when everybody started liking "alternative" music and alternative became the new pop (much to the chagrin and morbid fascination of those that had been listening to said "alternative" bands before everyone jumped on the bandwagon—hipsters are not a new thing).



> It could have been the 4E or the 9E, it doesn't really matters, it's quite the age we're living in.




Perhaps. But given that 5e is more accessible than 4e or 5e (like "basic" D&D was compared to AD&D decades ago), that might help.


----------



## robus (May 7, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> I'm given to understand that Starfinder is fairly successful?




How are you judging that? Not saying it’s not, I just haven’t seen evidence of it?


----------



## Parmandur (May 7, 2019)

robus said:


> How are you judging that? Not saying it’s not, I just haven’t seen evidence of it?




People I know are playing it, which is merely anecdotal, for one thing.

Primarily, sales charts. It's one of the best selling RPGs out at the moment, and has been consistently placing in the top five selling per ICV2 charts since it came out. By industry standards, removing D&D and Star Wars as a handicap, it seems a financial success.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (May 7, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> People I know are playing it, which is merely anecdotal, for one thing.
> 
> Primarily, sales charts. It's one of the best selling RPGs out at the moment, and has been consistently placing in the top five selling per ICV2 charts since it came out. By industry standards, removing D&D and Star Wars as a handicap, it seems a financial success.




The big problem I have with all these sales charts is that the book industry, and by extension the RPG industry, simply does not share actual numbers of units sold. So a chart showing the top 5, as a random example, could have the product in the #1 spot selling 1 million units, and then #2-5 selling 50k or less each, making their being top 5 actually meaningless.

Something like a Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds list of most played games tells me more, since they give percentages for each game played.

Plus, considering most everything other D&D 5E is available to buy in PDF, something like the Starfinder core book could have sold only in the thousands for print copies, but maybe the tens or hundreds of thousands in PDF, and I am pretty sure those ICV2 charts only account for sales of physical copies of books. So it could actually be a big seller when everything is factored in, or it could just be the third biggest flea on the elephant's back.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 7, 2019)

Jester David said:


> Gut feeling.
> Personal anecdotal evidence.
> I think people are reaching saturation. I need maybe one good monster book. I think one more subclass book is needed. Maybe the psion. And I have more adventures that I need. After that, there’s little they can publish to improvise my game.
> Meanwhile, I think most of the people who would play and are interested and been exposed already. New player acquisition is going to slow down.
> ...




I think we have not yet hit the peak. D&D as a brand has barely been tapped in terms of a mainstream audience. If the Critical Role cartoon gets good reviews and picked up by Amazon or Netflix and really takes off, that could bring a lot more people to the game who become curious because of the cartoon. They like the cartoon, they learn about the web stream, and then D&D. If a D&D movie is made that is actually successful, that could bring many new players. 

But even if you are correct, and we are close to the peak for new players, I don't think we are at the peak of profits. There is still a lot for WotC to make by licensing content to third-parties that a providing it in digital formats.  I think they'll want to milk these revenue sources a few more years, along with making money from software and books, for a few years before they bring in a new edition. I'm not sure that edition churn is the way to make money going forward.


----------



## Parmandur (May 7, 2019)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> The big problem I have with all these sales charts is that the book industry, and by extension the RPG industry, simply does not share actual numbers of units sold. So a chart showing the top 5, as a random example, could have the product in the #1 spot selling 1 million units, and then #2-5 selling 50k or less each, making their being top 5 actually meaningless.
> 
> Something like a Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds list of most played games tells me more, since they give percentages for each game played.
> 
> Plus, considering most everything other D&D 5E is available to buy in PDF, something like the Starfinder core book could have sold only in the thousands for print copies, but maybe the tens or hundreds of thousands in PDF, and I am pretty sure those ICV2 charts only account for sales of physical copies of books. So it could actually be a big seller when everything is factored in, or it could just be the third biggest flea on the elephant's back.




True, we only have vague ideas of relative success: I dunno if Starfinder is hitting Paizo's internal metric goals or whatever, but it is, relatively speaking, one of the best selling games of the past few years. I see no reason to doubt it's being successful in TTRPG industry terms.


----------



## S'mon (May 7, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> True, we only have vague ideas of relative success: I dunno if Starfinder is hitting Paizo's internal metric goals or whatever, but it is, relatively speaking, one of the best selling games of the past few years. I see no reason to doubt it's being successful in TTRPG industry terms.




I get the impression it's successful in standard industry terms, but not in "Pathfinder 2010" terms and certainly not in "5e D&D 2018" terms.


----------



## Morrus (May 7, 2019)

*Paizo To Make Kingmaker Bestiary... For D&amp;D 5E!*

Successful doesn’t mean “the single biggest” — there’s more than one successful company or person in the world. Successful means achieving the goals of the company.


----------



## Parmandur (May 7, 2019)

S'mon said:


> I get the impression it's successful in standard industry terms, but not in "Pathfinder 2010" terms and certainly not in "5e D&D 2018" terms.




Well, sure, probably not, but why would anyone expect that...?


----------



## zztong (May 7, 2019)

Hussar said:


> If Paizo then turns around and starts supporting 5e, suddenly that whole brand identity gets called into question.




I'm not saying you're wrong, but on a personal level, the PF2 Playtest stripped away any brand loyalty I had for Pathfinder. It also got several of my friends to start looking at 5e. To one of them, an official and supported pairing of 5e and Golarion would be ideal. It will be interesting to see where all the chips land.


----------



## Mercurius (May 7, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Successful doesn’t mean “the single biggest” — there’s more than one successful company or person in the world. Successful means achieving the goals of the company.




This is key. Americans in particular have the "king of the hill" mentality, as if the King Gorilla is the only successful gorilla. It is an incredibly myopic worldview. Not everyone has this view explicitly, but it is a subconscious influence that is particularly prevalent among Americans.


----------



## lyle.spade (May 7, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> This is key. Americans in particular have the "king of the hill" mentality, as if the King Gorilla is the only successful gorilla. It is an incredibly myopic worldview. Not everyone has this view explicitly, but it is a subconscious influence that is particularly prevalent among Americans.




Interesting observation, or perceived observation. We can also tend to be a bit manic...everything is awesome and spotless, or all is lost.

That aside, there is plenty of room in the market for a few big players, but 5e has really pushed aside most all other systems, and it starting to spread in a manner somewhat like during the d20 era, although I think overall the quality of third party work is much higher than 15+ years ago.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (May 7, 2019)

Don't forget the non-English-speaker market of the RPGs. Lot of players are too young and they would rather to buy books in their own language. 

The end of Paizo is still far. It can sell things aren't published by WotC; new classes and PCs races. And Starfinder is a franchise with a great future.


----------



## TheSword (May 7, 2019)

I played Pathfinder for 10 years, but ultimately 1st edition became too bloated. The system needed a reset to make it tight again. However the old guard liked the bloat (or for them the range options it represents). If you’re a master of a system you don’t mind that the system requires mastery to play. Paizo’s release schedule was punishing. I do believe there is an issue with too much choice.

That said I don’t think Paizo’s best IP not the game system or the world of Golarion (which is pretty bland). These are really just vehicles for what they do really well : great adventures! I don’t see any reason why these couldn’t run across multiple systems and increase their reach exponentially. It worked in the days of 3e. Why not now.

Kingmaker, Skull and Shackles, Curse of the Crimson throne, Carrion Crown, Serpants skull are amazing campaigns that are truly world class. They deserve official conversion to 5e.


----------



## Morrus (May 7, 2019)

TheSword said:


> I played Pathfinder for 10 years, but ultimately 1st edition became too bloated.




Isn’t it exactly as bloated as the number of books you choose to buy and use?


----------



## Mistwell (May 7, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Isn’t it exactly as bloated as the number of books you choose to buy and use?




I've written about this concept a lot before, but the short answer is no.

The longer answer is that nobody is an island in a group game like this. Particularly if you are the DM, and you're playing with friends who buy stuff they like, it becomes increasingly difficult to say no to everything, to test everything and see how it works with everything else, to anticipate how things will be used, etc.. 

Bloat impacts most people, even if they don't buy the books with those books. It usually creates unpleasant peer pressure if you are not willing to look at new stuff - and if you are willing to look at new stuff, that is itself a burden on you.  And then if you say no, that's an additional (often frequent) burden dealing with the friends who asked.  There is also a culture surrounding a game, not the least of which is this very message board, and opting out of new stuff sometimes means opting out of that culture and conversation with your peers.

The more stuff out there for a game, the more it impacts you.


----------



## Morrus (May 7, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> I've written about this concept a lot before, but the short answer is no.
> 
> The longer answer is that nobody is an island in a group game like this. Particularly if you are the DM, and you're playing with friends who buy stuff they like, it becomes increasingly difficult to say no to everything, to test everything and see how it works with everything else, to anticipate how things will be used, etc..




I can’t get my friends to buy my own supplements let alone anybody else’s. Maybe I’m unusual, but this problem doesn’t exist for me — we simply use whatever books the GM (me) provides.


----------



## TheSword (May 7, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Isn’t it exactly as bloated as the number of books you choose to buy and use?




I think that is true to some extent. Though with all of Pathfinder content in the Pfsrd, there were about 1500 feats if memory serves about 200 subclasses, 30 classes all available at player’s fingertips. I think in the end the designers become as paralysed by this as new players and DM do. It also become almost impossible to balance power when these things can be combined in so many things ways.

I remember starting a new group I’d collected and two experienced players trying to coach three new players through character gen. It was so time consuming - even with the 50 or so feats in the core books. The whole process took the entire five hour session.


----------



## Morrus (May 7, 2019)

TheSword said:


> I think that is true to some extent. Though with all of Pathfinder content in the Pfsrd, there were about 1500 feats if memory serves about 200 subclasses, 30 classes all available at player’s fingertips. I think in the end the designers become as paralysed by this as new players and DM do. It also become almost impossible to balance power when these things can be combined in so many things ways.
> 
> I remember starting a new group I’d collected and two experienced players trying to coach three new players through character gen. It was so time consuming - even with the 50 or so feats in the core books. The whole process took the entire five hour session.




Just take the core rulebook along and say that’s what you’re using.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica (May 7, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Isn’t it exactly as bloated as the number of books you choose to buy and use?




Maybe, as long as you don't use official adventures/APs. The last many of them are bloated with monsters from late bestiaries, not to speak of the npcs who have classes, abilities and feats many people haven't even heard about. Sure, it's online for free, but a real pain to use.


----------



## TheSword (May 7, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Just take the core rulebook along and say that’s what you’re using.




That is an option. However as Matrix says the APs are using stuff beyond the core rulebook. Well beyond it.

It also begs the question what’s the point of playing in a system that doesn’t grow. Pathfinder grew too fast in a glut of trying to release two products a month at least.

5e grows, but at a manageable pace. With the option for conversions if you want to try things not released yet.


----------



## zztong (May 7, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> This is key. Americans in particular have the "king of the hill" mentality, as if the King Gorilla is the only successful gorilla. It is an incredibly myopic worldview. Not everyone has this view explicitly, but it is a subconscious influence that is particularly prevalent among Americans.




Perhaps. But I think it is more the notion that "business is war" and this is the discussion of the spectators and fans. That isn't unique to the USA. I want to say it is probably shared with parts of Asia, but that's not my field of study and I could be... well am... usually full of it.


----------



## darjr (May 7, 2019)

We had camel camel camel for a while and if I remember correctly the stsrfinder book did about as well as one of the earlier supplements of 5e on Amazon. Anybody know another sales tank aggregater?


----------



## Mercurius (May 7, 2019)

lyle.spade said:


> Interesting observation, or perceived observation. We can also tend to be a bit manic...everything is awesome and spotless, or all is lost.
> 
> That aside, there is plenty of room in the market for a few big players, but 5e has really pushed aside most all other systems, and it starting to spread in a manner somewhat like during the d20 era, although I think overall the quality of third party work is much higher than 15+ years ago.




Agreement with both parts. As to the latter, I think this is for two reasons, mainly: One, improvements in publishing technology; two, fewer people publishing "my kewl campaign setting I've always wanted to publish."



zztong said:


> Perhaps. But I think it is more the notion that "business is war" and this is the discussion of the spectators and fans. That isn't unique to the USA. I want to say it is probably shared with parts of Asia, but that's not my field of study and I could be... well am... usually full of it.




It is not unique to the US, but the US has been most successful at it, for the most part. At least thus far - that is changing. But it is more of a mentality - and yes, it is "business is war," an extrapolation of social Darwinism.


----------



## kenmarable (May 7, 2019)

FYI - the Kingmaker crowdfunding campaign is open and the support they are offering for 5e - they are also offering *the exact same support for PF 1e*. Both have an option for the Bestiary. So, they are supporting 5e and PF 1e the exact same amount.

Also, in regards to D&D & CR becoming mainstream, last night the official Chuck E Cheese twitter account was replying to Krystina Arielle (cosplayer and in a couple streaming D&D games, I think), and asked if Matt Mercer could DM a game for them. Yes, the corporation known for kids' birthday parties, pizza, games, and animatronic singing animals is requesting a D&D game with Matt Mercer. We are beyond D&D just being a small niche for nerds. 

And can you just imagine a game of D&D with a bunch of fully costumed corporate mascots??? (Sure, there's the crass capitalism involved, but make it for a children's charity or something.) It would be surreal to watch Chuck E Cheese, Ronald McDonald, the Burger King, and such sitting around the table rolling dice!


----------



## Mercador (May 7, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Successful doesn’t mean “the single biggest” — there’s more than one successful company or person in the world. Successful means achieving the goals of the company.




Thanks Morrus, I guess I still need to learn some English ropes


----------



## Mercador (May 7, 2019)

Azzy said:


> Eh, I don't see that. It's not that "being different" is popular (any more than it's ever been given the history of counter culture), it's that geekish delights have just become mainstream—it's like in the 90s when everybody started liking "alternative" music and alternative became the new pop (much to the chagrin and morbid fascination of those that had been listening to said "alternative" bands before everyone jumped on the bandwagon—hipsters are not a new thing).




I guess we are around the same age then (almost 42 here). Here's my assumption; I think nerds (not popular) became geeks (popular) because in the pre-internet ages (oh my god, I can't believe I'm that old already..), only nerds could know how a computer would work. Now, everything needs Internet. Being geek (nerd) is cool now and geeks play TTRPG. It might be that our generation got their freetime back with kids growing and we want to get back to our fondest memories of TTRPG, thus, DnD, but we aren't the industry backbone anymore, the 18-25 is and they like DnD5E. As far as I know, it's easier to play and this generation don't have the time (nor the focus) needed to learn the 3.5/PF rules. 

Even if Paizo thinks it could make a ADnD with PF2, I don't think it will work unfortunately. That being said, I really hope that I'm wrong because we really need competition. In a world where WotC is totally dominant, the consumer will suffer.



Parmandur said:


> I'm given to understand that Starfinder is fairly successful?





I don't think so, but that's only on my observation. Here in Quebec City, there's a big hobby shop called Imaginaire where they sell pretty much everything TTRPG related, I'm pretty sure it's the biggest in eastern Canada as I didn't even find a store that big in Toronto. They have bookshelves of TTRPG stuff, DnD5 and PF1 are almost equally covered (tens of books each) but only one or two Starfinder books. There's ten times more books of Star Wars stuff. There's more books of Adventures in the Middle Earth or other 5E supplements. 


In my book, Starfinder could have been a PF1 scifi crossover and it would have been more succesful.


----------



## Parmandur (May 8, 2019)

Mercador said:


> I guess we are around the same age then (almost 42 here). Here's my assumption; I think nerds (not popular) became geeks (popular) because in the pre-internet ages (oh my god, I can't believe I'm that old already..), only nerds could know how a computer would work. Now, everything needs Internet. Being geek (nerd) is cool now and geeks play TTRPG. It might be that our generation got their freetime back with kids growing and we want to get back to our fondest memories of TTRPG, thus, DnD, but we aren't the industry backbone anymore, the 18-25 is and they like DnD5E. As far as I know, it's easier to play and this generation don't have the time (nor the focus) needed to learn the 3.5/PF rules.
> 
> Even if Paizo thinks it could make a ADnD with PF2, I don't think it will work unfortunately. That being said, I really hope that I'm wrong because we really need competition. In a world where WotC is totally dominant, the consumer will suffer.
> 
> ...




My personal theory is that people didn't want to seem weird for liking stuff like Lord of the Rings or Spiderman, but now feel free to let it all hang out knowing they are not alone.

I don't see how Starfinder could have been more successful: it's off-brand Star Wars using off-brand D&D rules. Of course D&D and Star Wars are more successful in the same field.


----------



## MerricB (May 8, 2019)

Matrix Sorcica said:


> Maybe, as long as you don't use official adventures/APs. The last many of them are bloated with monsters from late bestiaries, not to speak of the npcs who have classes, abilities and feats many people haven't even heard about. Sure, it's online for free, but a real pain to use.




This is a key point. It's very hard to ignore the extra content when the official adventures use a LOT of it.

Cheers!


----------



## MNblockhead (May 8, 2019)

TheSword said:


> Paizo’s release schedule was punishing. I do believe there is an issue with too much choice.




Sincere questions. I see this complaint made about Pathfinder and even more so when people talk about 3/3.5 and the d20 "glut."

What is stopping you from just sticking to the core rulebook? You don't *have* to buy every book that comes out. Right?

If a player has an class they want to play, they can petition their DM for it. Then the DM needs to know core + player's class. 

Even with 5e, I don't bother to attain even familiarity with every race and class, just those in my games. 

Is this mentality due to organized play?  Or is our hobby really dominated by completionist collectors? 

If the core rules are hard to learn that's a valid criticism. But complaining about too many options and bloat seems unfair. You don't like them, ignore them. 

This is something 5e has done well. Even as they've release more options, you can still pare the game down to the Players Handbook without feats. 

Heck, in my first 5e campaign, I limited race and class selections beyond what is available in the PHB or Basic Rules. Partly to create a theme, partly to make it easier for me to ease back into DMing. 

If you allow third-party material into your game, you can make 5e quite crunchy and customizable. Most people choose to ignore most third-party stuff. Here's a secret: you can ignore a most of the "official" material as well.


----------



## Mistwell (May 8, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> I've written about this concept a lot before, but the short answer is no.
> 
> The longer answer is that nobody is an island in a group game like this. Particularly if you are the DM, and you're playing with friends who buy stuff they like, it becomes increasingly difficult to say no to everything, to test everything and see how it works with everything else, to anticipate how things will be used, etc..
> 
> ...






MNblockhead said:


> Sincere questions. I see this complaint made about Pathfinder and even more so when people talk about 3/3.5 and the d20 "glut."
> 
> What is stopping you from just sticking to the core rulebook? You don't *have* to buy every book that comes out. Right?
> 
> If a player has an class they want to play, they can petition their DM for it. Then the DM needs to know core + player's class.





Objection, asked and answered


----------



## MNblockhead (May 8, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> Objection, asked and answered




Sorry, replied before getting through the thread. 

I don't understand how PF gives NPC and monster stat blocks. For a monster, I could see just giving the name and parenthetical letting you know which bestiary you need. But for NPCs, are they built like characters? Wouldn't they be treated like monsters and just have a description of their abilities in their stat block? If not, ouch! Yes, that would suck.

I also wasn't thinking of the poor game designer who would have to take into account all of the official classes and feats when designing an adventure.

One could always just run their own home-brew adventures...but that is a lot of work, which will turn away a lot of people from being game master for the system. 

I concede the point.


----------



## Parmandur (May 8, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> Sorry, replied before getting through the thread.
> 
> I don't understand how PF gives NPC and monster stat blocks. For a monster, I could see just giving the name and parenthetical letting you know which bestiary you need. But for NPCs, are they built like characters? Wouldn't they be treated like monsters and just have a description of their abilities in their stat block? If not, ouch! Yes, that would suck.
> 
> ...




Oh, sweet Summer child: in 3.x/Pathfinder, all monsters are built like PCs.

Every. Single. One. Classes, Feats, the whole shebang.


----------



## pkt77242 (May 8, 2019)

I was very excited for this but upon seeing the pricing I am out. I would gladly pay $60 for the PF version (and convert it myself) or $80 for a true 5E version but the $80 for PF and $115 for 5E is a bridge to far.  This doesn’t properly gauge the market......and the late 2020 timeframe is even more baffling. Hard pass.


----------



## Hussar (May 8, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> , the while shebang.




The before and after shebang as well.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica (May 8, 2019)

pkt77242 said:


> I was very excited for this but upon seeing the pricing I am out. I would gladly pay $60 for the PF version (and convert it myself) or $80 for a true 5E version but the $80 for PF and $115 for 5E is a bridge to far.  This doesn’t properly gauge the market......and the late 2020 timeframe is even more baffling. Hard pass.



Same. Anyone know if it will show up in normal distribution channels eventually?


----------



## TheSword (May 8, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> Oh, sweet Summer child: in 3.x/Pathfinder, all monsters are built like PCs.Every. Single. One. Classes, Feats, the whole shebang.



I think the other part to monsters and NPC design is that even a relatively low level monster or NPC could have a half dozen + abilities. Then there are feats, many of which need to be chained together to be effective because of pathfinders bonus progression system. What if you want to give the NPC cleaving finish, a feat released in one of the later splat books? Do you reprint the rules for the feat or go without, even though it makes the two weapon fighter less effective. It’s a quandary.If players come from different groups then they don’t want sections of the games they know cut off from them. The biggest issue with Pathfinder though to my mind are the balance issues when you get a mixed group of new players and experienced players. It’s possible because the progression system to make a character who is broken as hell or completely ineffective depending on a few feat choices and class abilities.


----------



## M.T. Black (May 8, 2019)

The other issue with a bloated product line is that it makes it harder for new players to onboard. Mike Mearls spoke about this as one of the reasons behind the constrained 5e release schedule. Would-be new players were simply overwhelmed by the amount of content they had to navigate through. Sure, you can say, "Just buy the core books", but that assumes they have a trusted voice to guide them through the tangle.

There was also the sad/amusing anecdote of the would-be newbie who bought the Player's Handbook 3, thinking he would skip the older versions and just get the latest!


----------



## Nightfly (May 8, 2019)

M.T. Black said:


> The other issue with a bloated product line is that it makes it harder for new players to onboard. Mike Mearls spoke about this as one of the reasons behind the constrained 5e release schedule. Would-be new players were simply overwhelmed by the amount of content they had to navigate through. Sure, you can say, "Just buy the core books", but that assumes they have a trusted voice to guide them through the tangle.
> 
> There was also the sad/amusing anecdote of the would-be newbie who bought the Player's Handbook 3, thinking he would skip the older versions and just get the latest!




Thanks for sharing this anecdote. It really shows why shoveling supplements out the door becomes a problem.

One of the best things about 5e is that it started with just 12 basic classes, and then over the ensuing five years, it's ballooned all the way up to...uh, still just 12 classes. That's *awesome*. WotC keeps players happy with a few new subclasses and spells, and doesn't foist weird classes like _Warden _or _Witch _or _Paladin Except Left-Handed and Lactose Intolerant _on everyone. I really appreciate that.

EDIT: 12, not 9. Counting is hard.


----------



## S'mon (May 8, 2019)

TheSword said:


> It also begs the question what’s the point of playing in a system that doesn’t grow.




I don't think this is a question that even occurs to most players of most RPGs.


----------



## Remathilis (May 8, 2019)

S'mon said:


> I don't think this is a question that even occurs to most players of most RPGs.



And yet...

AD&D 1e players, whose system was no longer supported as of 1989, still bought new material (either converting 2e stuff back, or later using OSR stuff). So while technically an RPG is never lacking for new material as long as you have a clever DM and some inspiration, even the deadest system's players still clamor for new material.


----------



## S'mon (May 8, 2019)

Remathilis said:


> And yet...
> 
> AD&D 1e players, whose system was no longer supported as of 1989, still bought new material (either converting 2e stuff back, or later using OSR stuff). So while technically an RPG is never lacking for new material as long as you have a clever DM and some inspiration, even the deadest system's players still clamor for new material.




The line I quoted was about a "system that doesn't grow", not about "material" - which could be adventures, campaign settings and such using the system without adding any more rules. I think everyone likes to see new material in the latter sense.


----------



## oreofox (May 8, 2019)

Nightfly said:


> Thanks for sharing this anecdote. It really shows why shoveling supplements out the door becomes a problem.  One of the best things about 5e is that it started with just 9 basic classes, and then over the ensuing five years, it's ballooned all the way up to...uh, still just 9 classes. That's *awesome*. WotC keeps players happy with a few new subclasses and spells, and doesn't foist weird classes like _Warden _or _Witch _or _Paladin Except Left-Handed and Lactose Intolerant _on everyone. I really appreciate that.



  There's more than 9 classes in 5e D&D: Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard. That's 11 in the PHB, plus there's the Artificer they have been working on for the last year+. Yes, 12 is a lot less than the near 30 that Pathfinder has. Still, they have kept the number of actual classes the same in the last 5 years.


----------



## Nightfly (May 8, 2019)

We're both wrong: it's actually 12. (You left out Paladin). Sorry I missed the number so badly - I shouldn't post right before I go to sleep.


----------



## zztong (May 8, 2019)

S'mon said:


> The line I quoted was about a "system that doesn't grow", not about "material" - which could be adventures, campaign settings and such using the system without adding any more rules. I think everyone likes to see new material in the latter sense.




Yeh, right on. A "dead" system can be convenient for a DM. You won't find players clamoring to use the "latest thing."

I would add that sometimes even a "dead" setting can be convenient too. You won't wake up to find that somebody has decided that Tieflings (Forgotten Realms) and Goblins (Golarion) are now living in your cities or that suddenly Gnomes are monsters (D&D 4e). You won't find the deities have changed or that magic went nuts and clobbered a continent or region.

The trade-off between continuity and convenience can be a tough choice.


----------



## TheSword (May 8, 2019)

S'mon said:


> The line I quoted was about a "system that doesn't grow", not about "material" - which could be adventures, campaign settings and such using the system without adding any more rules. I think everyone likes to see new material in the latter sense.




How do you support that supposition? D&D, Pathfinder, WFRP, Adventurers in Middle Earth (the systems I have experience with) are all releasing new rules, options and supplementary information. I suspect players of these systems probably pathfinder and 5e dnd alone represent a large proportion of players given there prominence in the industry.

Surely everybody prefers playing in a living system rather than a dead one. Incidentally I would include campaign materials and adventures as examples of a living system. You can’t separate the text and artwork of a campaign book from the rules that support that.


----------



## Rellott (May 8, 2019)

Legendary Games has announced that they’ll be doing the 5e conversion of the bestiary. They’re probably best known in 5e for their forest kingdom and pirate/nautical book... both of which are riddled with pathfinder-isms and poor conversions. 
I was a bit hopeful that this would open up the floodgates for PF adventures to be converted into 5e, but with that team leading the conversion, it’s not going to be worth it.


----------



## Morrus (May 8, 2019)

Rellott said:


> Legendary Games has announced that they’ll be doing the 5e conversion of the bestiary.




Huh! I’d have bet a lot in it being Kobold Press.


----------



## Rellott (May 8, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Huh! I’d have bet a lot in it being Kobold Press.




And I’d preorder it in a heartbeat if it was. I feel like KP probably has enough of their own stuff going on that they don’t really need Paizo at this point, though.


----------



## The Hierophant (May 8, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> My personal theory is that people didn't want to seem weird for liking stuff like Lord of the Rings or Spiderman, but now feel free to let it all hang out knowing they are not alone.




I think the Lord of the Rings (and Hobbit) films and Game of Thrones have had a far bigger impact than Critical Role or Stranger Things. They brought fantasy into the mainstream and paved the way. 

We've also had a couple of generations raised on Harry Potter.


----------



## Staffan (May 8, 2019)

MerricB said:


> This is a key point. It's very hard to ignore the extra content when the official adventures use a LOT of it.



And using optional content is to a large degree a selling point with the APs. Back in 3.5e, adventures rarely used non-core stuff (plus setting core book stuff for adventures based in a particular setting). So you might have bought Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic, the Expanded Psionics Handbook, Dragon Magic, Magic of Incarnum, and all seven Complete books... but you won't see any of that stuff in a published adventure, so if you want those things to have a place in the world you need to make that place yourself - or if you did see a feat or something used, it would be reprinted to avoid confusion.

Pathfinder, by comparison, revels in using stuff from many different sources. For example, the Battle of Bloodmarsh Hill (Giantslayer 1) has stuff from a dozen books in addition to the core book and the Bestiary. Paizo can get away with this because all that stuff is available online, but there's still a subtle hint to the GM (or players) of "Look at this cool stuff, don't you want that?"


----------



## Staffan (May 8, 2019)

The Hierophant said:


> I think the Lord of the Rings (and Hobbit) films and Game of Thrones have had a far bigger impact than Critical Role or Stranger Things. They brought fantasy into the mainstream and paved the way.
> 
> We've also had a couple of generations raised on Harry Potter.




The Lord of the Rings movies are ancient by comparison. Return of the King was released in 2003, 16 years ago. Whatever effect they were going to have on D&D's popularity should have hit with 3e.


----------



## Parmandur (May 8, 2019)

Staffan said:


> The Lord of the Rings movies are ancient by comparison. Return of the King was released in 2003, 16 years ago. Whatever effect they were going to have on D&D's popularity should have hit with 3e.




So, it came out when today's high school and college students were little kids, taking in pop culture. And it just grew from there.


----------



## MerricB (May 8, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Huh! I’d have bet a lot in it being Kobold Press.




I've got a feeling that Wolfgang and team are VERY busy with their own material.  I'm not entirely sure it'd be worth their while to do a conversion bestiary (profits likely split with Paizo) rather than just producing Tome of Beasts 3. 

Cheers!


----------



## Morrus (May 8, 2019)

Staffan said:


> The Lord of the Rings movies are ancient by comparison. Return of the King was released in 2003, 16 years ago. Whatever effect they were going to have on D&D's popularity should have hit with 3e.




I think he has a point in that they were early examples of the mainstreaming of geek culture. It grew from then, but that's when geek culture started to feel like it was mainstream. The effects, of course, knocked on over years.


----------



## Mercador (May 8, 2019)

Morrus said:


> I think he has a point in that they were early examples of the mainstreaming of geek culture. It grew from then, but that's when geek culture started to feel like it was mainstream. The effects, of course, knocked on over years.




Yep, before LOTR, it's was pretty dry. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fantasy_films_of_the_1990s

Though, I still think it's because of the Internet that "geek" is now cool. We don't use "nerds" anymore but it's pretty much the same.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 9, 2019)

Staffan said:


> The Lord of the Rings movies are ancient by comparison. Return of the King was released in 2003, 16 years ago. Whatever effect they were going to have on D&D's popularity should have hit with 3e.




Exactly. Those kids who grew up in a world where fantasy movies were blockbuster, Oscar-winning movies grew up to be today's millennial streaming their games on Youtube and Twitch. 

I don't think you can point to one watershed moment. There has been a cultural shift. My generation of geeks from the 80s are now running companies, hosting TV shows, and fueling 80s-nostalgia shows like Stranger Things.  The generation after us took our hobbies main stream and into their adulthood. 

My kids are growing up never having known a world where comic super heroes, computer games, fantasy, scifi, and cos play were not mainstream.


----------



## robus (May 9, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> Exactly. Those kids who grew up in a world where fantasy movies were blockbuster, Oscar-winning movies grew up to be today's millennial streaming their games on Youtube and Twitch.
> 
> I don't think you can point to one watershed moment. There has been a cultural shift. My generation of geeks from the 80s are now running companies, hosting TV shows, and fueling 80s-nostalgia shows like Stranger Things.  The generation after us took our hobbies main stream and into their adulthood.
> 
> My kids are growing up never having known a world where comic super heroes, computer games, fantasy, scifi, and cos play were not mainstream.




Yep my daughter grew up quite the nerd, Star Trek characters at halloween, devouring Harry Potter. Briefly turned away during high school (as you do), but now thoroughly happy to indulge her interests once more. Only wish 5e had been around a few years earlier so we could have adventured together.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 9, 2019)

robus said:


> Yep my daughter grew up quite the nerd, Star Trek characters at halloween, devouring Harry Potter. Briefly turned away during high school (as you do), but now thoroughly happy to indulge her interests once more. Only wish 5e had been around a few years earlier so we could have adventured together.




You still can.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (May 9, 2019)

I was a maybe until I discovered that I couldn’t get the bestiary by itself. That, combined with the AP being for PF, rather than 5E and a 2020 release date made it a no for me.


----------



## The Hierophant (May 9, 2019)

Staffan said:


> The Lord of the Rings movies are ancient by comparison. Return of the King was released in 2003, 16 years ago. Whatever effect they were going to have on D&D's popularity should have hit with 3e.




That’s sort of my point, but I disagree with your conclusion. 

The ten year old who saw Return of the King in 2003 is 26 now and is right in the age group that seems to be picking up 5e. 

And lots of children/teenagers wouldn’t have seen it then, they’d have seen it on DVD or TV later. So the 20-35 age group would have been at that age and I think it would have influenced them. 

I think a stranger things is too recent. It’s D&D is helpful to 5e but it’s really just a homage to ET.


----------



## Mercador (May 9, 2019)

Maybe it's because we are the main workforce now and our children follow our footsteps


----------



## chibi graz'zt (May 9, 2019)

Do you think that PF core rules will be published for 5e soon; does this mean that everything will be 5e?


----------



## oreofox (May 9, 2019)

Nightfly said:


> We're both wrong: it's actually 12. (You left out Paladin). Sorry I missed the number so badly - I shouldn't post right before I go to sleep.



  Now I feel silly that I left out Paladin, especially since I am playing one in a game... Guess I should wake up a bit more before I post


----------



## robus (May 9, 2019)

chibi graz'zt said:


> Do you think that PF core rules will be published for 5e soon; does this mean that everything will be 5e?




I'm not sure what you mean by that? PF and 5e are pretty fundamentally incompatible?


----------



## chibi graz'zt (May 9, 2019)

robus said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by that? PF and 5e are pretty fundamentally incompatible?




Sorry, what I meant was, isn't PF D&D 3.5+? So if they are now publishing for 5e will they be adopting the more streamlined 5e rules like they did back in the OGL days? Plus wasn't Paizo essentially a licensed WotC publisher back in the day? Seems natural Paizo would want to cross over to the vast popularity of 5e.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 9, 2019)

And the thread begins anew...


----------



## Morrus (May 9, 2019)

*Paizo To Make Kingmaker Bestiary... For D&amp;D 5E!*



chibi graz'zt said:


> Do you think that PF core rules will be published for 5e soon; does this mean that everything will be 5e?




How would you distinguish between PF core rules using 5E rules and 5E core rules? The only difference between them is the rules. They’d just be publishing 5E.  And then why would people buy 5E from Paizo rather than WotC?


----------



## robus (May 9, 2019)

chibi graz'zt said:


> Sorry, what I meant was, isn't PF D&D 3.5+? So if they are now publishing for 5e will they be adopting the more streamlined 5e rules like they did back in the OGL days? Plus wasn't Paizo essentially a licensed WotC publisher back in the day? Seems natural Paizo would want to cross over to the vast popularity of 5e.




As the Capn notes, this has been thoroughly debated throughout this thread. Take a tour through the earlier posts.


----------



## chibi graz'zt (May 9, 2019)

robus said:


> As the Capn notes, this has been thoroughly debated throughout this thread. Take a tour through the earlier posts.




No time unfortunately, what's a summary of the consensus?


----------



## robus (May 9, 2019)

chibi graz'zt said:


> No time unfortunately, what's a summary of the consensus?




No consensus as there are good arguments on both sides. Paizo is caught on the horns of a dilemma. Shift to 5e compatible products and potentially reap larger profits (from the larger market) at the risk of pissing off its PF fanbase. Or stay the course and hope that enough of the base shifts over to PF 2 (and buys a whole bunch of stuff in the process).

I'm actually a fan of a combo approach. Publish new adventures and content for PF 2. Refurbish the best PF 1 APs and bestiaries for 5e. But that has the potential of pissing off everyone


----------



## Mistwell (May 9, 2019)

chibi graz'zt said:


> No time unfortunately, what's a summary of the consensus?




No, Paizo is not publishing PF as 5e. 

It's possible we might see Paizo publish adventure conversions for 5e. It's possible we might see Paizo publish expansion book conversions for 5e. Who knows.


----------



## thundershot (May 10, 2019)

robus said:


> I'm actually a fan of a combo approach. Publish new adventures and content for PF 2. Refurbish the best PF 1 APs and bestiaries for 5e. But that has the potential of pissing off everyone




Hey, I really like that idea. I’d be all in!


----------



## kenmarable (May 10, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> No, Paizo is not publishing PF as 5e.
> 
> It's possible we might see Paizo publish adventure conversions for 5e. It's possible we might see Paizo publish expansion book conversions for 5e. Who knows.




Exactly. Plus it's important to note that Paizo is *publishing* a 5e book but it's being *written* by an outside company - Legendary Games. So they are still keeping their staff focused on PF.


----------



## Morrus (May 10, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> Exactly. Plus it's important to note that Paizo is *publishing* a 5e book but it's being *written* by an outside company - Legendary Games. So they are still keeping their staff focused on PF.




That’s exactly how WotC produced several hardcovers. Still counts!


----------



## EthanSental (May 10, 2019)

So you have to back it at the $50 for the PF AP and companion guide to them be able to add on the 35 for the 5e bestiary?


----------



## kenmarable (May 10, 2019)

Morrus said:


> That’s exactly how WotC produced several hardcovers. Still counts!




I'm not saying it doesn't. Sorry if my comment was too brief and unclear, but my main point it towards those who think this is some sign that Paizo is worried PF 2e might fail and are shifting towards being a 5e publisher. 

For one thing, with WotC it was different because their staff was still working on other 5e system books. With Paizo, they are not. Their staff is still focused on PF.

For another thing, Paizo is having fans pay for the creation of it. So depending on how much art & layout work is outsourced to Legendary Games as well, Paizo might have close to *zero* investment of their own resources in 5e beyond maybe warehouse space and distribution, I guess.

So, sure, it absolutely counts that they are publishing a 5e book. But in regards to those who wonder if Paizo is making a major shift to 5e, they are doing pretty much the bare minimum of work and resources on their side to produce it. They aren't even putting their own money into the project!

WotC used some outside designers to produce a few books, too, but everything else about the situations is dramatically different. So I'm not saying that doesn't make Paizo a 5e publisher, just that all signs point to it being an extraneous side-project rather than a shift in their focus.


----------



## Mistwell (May 10, 2019)

Posted without further comment other than to say I found it somewhat interesting to read this history, biased though it may be:

*Jessica Price, former Paizo Employee, Comments on This Product*.


----------



## Azzy (May 11, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> Posted without further comment other than to say I found it somewhat interesting to read this history, biased though it may be:
> 
> *Jessica Price, former Paizo Employee, Comments on This Product*.




Oh. Wow. That's not a pretty picture.


----------



## Parmandur (May 11, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> Posted without further comment other than to say I found it somewhat interesting to read this history, biased though it may be:
> 
> *Jessica Price, former Paizo Employee, Comments on This Product*.




On the one hand, she is a former employee with potentially an axe to grind. On the other, her narrative is plausible and would be excellent motivation for being an ex-employee with an axe to grind.

This certainly seems...bad...for the long term survivability of the business and game line.


----------



## robus (May 11, 2019)

That’s a pretty brutal exposé, wow!

Edit: and I was wondering why this wasn’t on Kickstarter...


----------



## Olaf the Stout (May 11, 2019)

Mistwell said:


> Posted without further comment other than to say I found it somewhat interesting to read this history, biased though it may be:
> 
> *Jessica Price, former Paizo Employee, Comments on This Product*.



She makes many good points. In addition to being forced to buy the AP in order to have the chance to buy the Bestiary, there were several red flags she pointed out that made me wary of backing this one.

That said, she also sounds very salty. Does anyone know what led to her no longer working for Paizo?


----------



## kenmarable (May 11, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> On the one hand, she is a former employee with potentially an axe to grind. On the other, her narrative is plausible and would be excellent motivation for being an ex-employee with an axe to grind.
> 
> This certainly seems...bad...for the long term survivability of the business and game line.




Plus a lot of what she says isn't even opinion/inside-knowledge but publicly verifiable facts: Their previous Kickstarters for Pathfinder Online, and the current state of that project. Their Kickstarter with Ninja Division for Starfinder minis including their public posts about "I know people are worried based on Ninja Division's past, but it will be fine" and how that one turned out. The $999 shipping charge for many foreign addresses on this crowdfunding. Or even crowdfunding these books when they have simply published similar books as this as standard business for years. And so on.

So whatever narrative she wraps around it, all of those are facts about their crowdfunding history that anyone can see. So whether it's bad luck in choosing business partners or whether the narrative she puts around it is accurate is a big question, but at the very least she does a great job of bringing together that whole history - much of which is public knowledge. Make of it as you will. As you say, it certainly does not look good for long term prospects.


----------



## kenmarable (May 11, 2019)

Olaf the Stout said:


> She makes many good points. In addition to being forced to buy the AP in order to have the chance to buy the Bestiary, there were several red flags she pointed out that made me wary of backing this one.
> 
> That said, she also sounds very salty. Does anyone know what led to her no longer working for Paizo?




I don't recall specifics (and most of it, of course, wasn't real public), but the general impression seemed to be the "employee spoke up about harassment and workplace culture issues and gets fired" vs "employee is not a good fit and does not work with our customers well" sort of two sides that seems unfortunately common (especially it seems with women in male-dominated industries, but that's my editorializing). 

Reading between the lines, as well as reading accounts of many other former employees, I 100% believe her version. More specifically, it seems to be a cultural view at Paizo that the customers are always right even when they are harassing and abusing the employees. It's telling that several former employees and formerly frequent freelancers won't even go to Paizo forums anymore because they claim that it is too toxic because Paizo is afraid that clamping down on that will drive customers away and hurt the business. Employees need to be friendly and nonconfrontational with customers.

Now, of course, that's just one side, and I'm quite open about my opinion on it. But seeing the same story across many former employees/freelancers, and giving up on the Paizo forums myself a while ago, it does seem quite believable.

So I suppose one person's "salty" is another person's "done putting up with BS."


----------



## billd91 (May 11, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> Reading between the lines, as well as reading accounts of many other former employees, I 100% believe her version. More specifically, it seems to be a cultural view at Paizo that the customers are always right even when they are harassing and abusing the employees. It's telling that several former employees and formerly frequent freelancers won't even go to Paizo forums anymore because they claim that it is too toxic because Paizo is afraid that clamping down on that will drive customers away and hurt the business. Employees need to be friendly and nonconfrontational with customers.
> 
> Now, of course, that's just one side, and I'm quite open about my opinion on it. But seeing the same story across many former employees/freelancers, and giving up on the Paizo forums myself a while ago, it does seem quite believable.




As a long-time participant on the Paizo site, I don't think it's any more toxic than here - and also pretty strongly moderated. There are times I've considered it more tightly moderated than here.


----------



## S'mon (May 11, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> Employees need to be friendly and nonconfrontational with customers.




That was never exactly Price's strong suit... she had a really negative effect on the tone* of the Paizo forums when I was posting there, and it seems to have been what eventually got her fired (twice). OTOH I don't particularly doubt her inside-dirt take on Paizo's business, it certainly seems plausible, and not particularly out of line for small businesses struggling to get by.  Of course she leaves out all the good things about Paizo, things which likely attracted her there in the first place.

*When you register at Paizo forums you get a note "We want our forums to be a fun and 
happy place", asking posters to be polite and kind. The vast majority of posters take the message on board. Paizo's employee Jessica Price was a very notable exception!


----------



## S'mon (May 11, 2019)

kenmarable said:


> I don't recall specifics (and most of it, of course, wasn't real public), but the general impression seemed to be the "employee spoke up about harassment and workplace culture issues and gets fired" vs "employee is not a good fit and does not work with our customers well" sort of two sides that seems unfortunately common (especially it seems with women in male-dominated industries, but that's my editorializing).




I think Lisa Stevens has always done her best to be fair to everyone at her company, and is not a whip-cracking instrument of Patriarchal Oppression.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 11, 2019)

This could be something akin to a new Osborne effect.

The Paizo effect: giving off the appearance (true or false) to be desperate enough that your future product really will tank.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (May 11, 2019)

Only 900 backers so far, which is less than I would have expected.


----------



## Morrus (May 11, 2019)

The only reason I haven’t backed yet is that I’m unfamiliar with the crowdfunding site being used. But I’m sure I will before the end.


----------



## Parmandur (May 11, 2019)

Olaf the Stout said:


> Only 900 backers so far, which is less than I would have expected.




It's not a terribly excellent deal, financially, and it could he that the natural audience (Pathfinder players) all ready have the original AP and don't want a PF2 version.


----------



## S'mon (May 11, 2019)

Parmandur said:


> It's not a terribly excellent deal, financially, and it could he that the natural audience (Pathfinder players) all ready have the original AP and don't want a PF2 version.




$50 pdf certainly seems high for a kickstarter. $80 for the print version, when I'd expect to pay around $60 retail for the AP hardback.


----------



## Parmandur (May 11, 2019)

S'mon said:


> $50 pdf certainly seems high for a kickstarter. $80 for the print version, when I'd expect to pay around $60 retail for the AP hardback.




Not to mention needing to pay more to get a second book to use it with PF1 or 5E, the two systems people would most likely want to use...


----------



## Zardnaar (May 11, 2019)

Not that bad a price. If you bought the PDFs of Kingmaker individually it's more than $50 iirc.

 I assume that includes the 5E conversion. 

 It's not hard to run Kingmaker 5E anyway. It lacks a lot of later Pathfinder splat material.


----------



## Parmandur (May 11, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Not that bad a price. If you bought the PDFs of Kingmaker individually it's more than $50 iirc.
> 
> I assume that includes the 5E conversion.
> 
> It's not hard to run Kingmaker 5E anyway. It lacks a lot of later Pathfinder splat material.




No, it does not include any 5E material: the PDF version for PF2 is $50, the print is $80, and the 5E conversion material is a $35 add-on product in print and PDF (as is the $35 Pathfinder 1 conversion product). So $85, minimum, to get this AP in 5E or PF1.


----------



## S'mon (May 11, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Not that bad a price. If you bought the PDFs of Kingmaker individually it's more than $50 iirc.




The 2012 Runelords hardback is $60. The pdf is $42. https://paizo.com/riseOfTheRunelords


----------



## Zardnaar (May 11, 2019)

Cheers I was thinking of the individual adventures. And have not bought Pathfinder PDFs outside of a humble bundle since 2012.


----------



## wakedown (May 11, 2019)

Too much friction on making this purchase...

Funny the first time I clicked on the site McAfee wouldn't let me go through (I imagine it's because kingmakercampaign.com isn't available via HTTPS and only HTTP).   Once I added the exception I was a bit surprised it was $50 for a PDF.  Usually a crowdfunded campaign gives you a sweet deal on the PDF (<$30) and including the hardcover would be in the $50-60 range. 

Given it won't likely be available until mid-to-late 2020, I'd imagine this is something that ends up being discounted during Paizo's holiday sales.  A lot of the APs end up very very inexpensive during that time (like $5 per installment).  So given you'd be waiting for probably over a year anyway, I figure might as well wait until the 2020 holiday sales on this one.

(plus it's also not just simply on Kickstarter, so more friction too)


----------



## EthanSental (May 11, 2019)

I was on the fence about the 5e purchase but climbed off when I had to pay $85 for it and things I don’t really want.  Paizo and Lisa “seem” to be following TSR and Lorraine Williams business model of producing too much, speculating in an MMO and failing like the card game TSR came up with and 
failed.  Hopefully with PF 2e they don’t flood the market and slow down the release schedule slightly.


----------



## CapnZapp (May 11, 2019)

Per that Twitter thread your card is charged immediately upon purchase (which apparently is different from regular Kickstarter?)


----------



## dave2008 (May 11, 2019)

CapnZapp said:


> Per that Twitter thread your card is charged immediately upon purchase (which apparently is different from regular Kickstarter?)




Yes, with Kickstarter you are not charged until the campaign ends (regardless of when it is "funded").  Up until the end of the campaign you can remove or modify your pledge.


----------



## dave2008 (May 11, 2019)

Interestingly the Bestiary is not the only 5e conversion they are offering.  There is also the "Forest Kingom" add-on, whatever that is.

I would be interested if I could just get the 5e content, but that doesn't seem to be the case.


----------



## Rellott (May 12, 2019)

dave2008 said:


> Interestingly the Bestiary is not the only 5e conversion they are offering.  There is also the "Forest Kingom" add-on, whatever that is.
> 
> I would be interested if I could just get the 5e content, but that doesn't seem to be the case.




The Forest Kingdom book was written and published by Legendary Games, the group that’s doing the 5e conversion for the bestiary. They are first and foremost a PF publisher, and it unfortunately shows in their 5e work.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (May 12, 2019)

Rellott said:


> The Forest Kingdom book was written and published by Legendary Games, the group that’s doing the 5e conversion for the bestiary. They are first and foremost a PF publisher, and it unfortunately shows in their 5e work.




I backed both the Forest Campaign Compendium and the Pirate one by Legendary Games for 5E and sold them shortly after receiving them.  Overall I found them to be just ok.  I looked at Kingmaker Bestairy for 5E and thought the cover looked cheesy.  It is an easy no for me.  Expensive since you have to back the full Kingmaker book plus the 5E bestiary and cheesy looking art.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 12, 2019)

I guess I'm spoiled by Kobold Press and Frog God Games Kickstarters. I just do not see the value here and the risk seems high given their track record. If it ever makes it to my FLGS shelves, I'll take a look at it, but I'm going to pass on backing the crowdfunding effort.

*EDIT*

I'm going to retract what I wrote above. For two large hard-cover books, plus the PDFs, it is not a bad deal. Also, by buying the PDFs, I if these become available in Fantasy Grounds or RealmWorks, I could get those version with the PDF cost discounted--though I'm not sure how that works if I buy from crowdfunding, I'm guessing fulfillment will be from the Paizo online store. 

But I have some questions I'm hoping those of you familiar with Paizo products can help answer:

Would the pathfinder stat blocks in the campaign setting and adventure books themselves, or would you need the Pathfinder beasteries? In other words, is the 5e Kingmaker Beastery an extra cost for 5e players or is it actually a deal, because Pathfinder players would need to own multiple PF beasteries?

Having the monster and npc stats for 5e is all well in good, but what about skill checks and other mechanics that apply to the non-combat aspects of the game? How easy is it to determine appropriate DC values for picking locks, finding secret doors, etc.?

I'm also concerned about whether they'll put on the work to make sure the npcs and monsters are balanced for 5e, so that the difficulty in 5e is comparable to what it would be in Pathfinder.


----------



## mach1.9pants (May 12, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> I guess I'm spoiled by Kobold Press and Frog God Games Kickstarters. I just do not see the value here and the risk seems high given their track record. If it ever makes it to my FLGS shelves, I'll take a look at it, but I'm going to pass on backing the crowdfunding effort.




'track record'? This is Paizo's first crowd funding effort, the previous ones were by (admittedly endorsed) 3PP. I can't see this doing anything but going well. But it will be all in retail, so not a huge problem -apart from the coins type stuff. You'll pay more but that's normal.


----------



## MNblockhead (May 12, 2019)

mach1.9pants said:


> 'track record'? This is Paizo's first crowd funding effort, the previous ones were by (admittedly endorsed) 3PP. I can't see this doing anything but going well. But it will be all in retail, so not a huge problem -apart from the coins type stuff. You'll pay more but that's normal.




Well, okay, fair enough. But that still leaves use with no track record other than endorsing failed third-party campaigns. Look, I'm not trying to be negative. I want to back Paizo and I'm excited to look into some of the PF adventure paths I've heard so much about. 

I'm also not sure how well running this in 5e would go. 

I'm probably going to wait until there are reviews of the material and see if this shows up in my FLGS where I can page through it.  For Pathfinder players, this seems like something worth backing. I'm just not sure if the same can be said for 5e players.


----------



## S'mon (May 12, 2019)

mach1.9pants said:


> 'track record'? This is Paizo's first crowd funding effort, the previous ones were by (admittedly endorsed) 3PP.




I think Goblinworks was rather more than an "endorsed 3PP" - it was set up by Paizo to run the project.


----------



## S'mon (May 12, 2019)

MNblockhead said:


> Having the monster and npc stats for 5e is all well in good, but what about skill checks and other mechanics that apply to the non-combat aspects of the game? How easy is it to determine appropriate DC values for picking locks, finding secret doors, etc.?




I'm running the PF Rise of the Runelords & Shattered Star APs in 5e, so I have a lot* of experience with this.

For skill DCs (and for ACs) you basically halve the value over 10, typically rounding down, eg

PF > 5e
10 > 10
15 > 12
20 > 15
30 > 20
35 > 22
40 > 25
45 > 27
50 > 30

I wouldn't go over DC 30.

For stuff that would allow a Take 20 in PF such as long term research, I may use a straight halving of the DC, so 55 > 27. I don't think I've seen a PF DC over 55 yet.

*PCs have gone from 1st to 20th, we have played most of Runelords books 2-5, all of Shattered Star books 1-4, and are currently about 2/3 through Shattered Star book 5. Will likely play Shattered Star 6; may or may not play Runelords 6 (Karzoug may end up as an ally of the PCs!) and plan to wind up with most of (a highly variant) Return of the Runelords 6 - Rise of New Thassilon for some VERY Epic PCs.


----------



## Ash Mantle (May 12, 2019)

To add a little bit of credence to Paizo's history of hastiness, they appear to refer to their partner as "Legnedary Games" on their Kickstarter platform. 

View attachment 106406

I wouldn't mind a PF2.0 version of the Kingmaker AP - that was an excellent AP despite its niggling issues, and I'd very much be interested in all of the additional inspired material from the Kingmaker game, any fan input and additional content. Though our group is very interested in playing Kingmaker again our group doesn't appear to be too interested in PF2.0. 
It's disappointing although understandable that the bestiaries in 5E and PF1.0 can only be purchased as add-ons, but given what's being said of Legendary's conversion work into 5E I think it's best we hold off for now. 

But will still be monitoring.


----------



## The Hierophant (May 12, 2019)

I was really interested in this but there are lots of signs that make me wary of backing. I think I’ll buy it at retail if the reviews are any good.


----------



## Remathilis (May 12, 2019)

Ok, I get the effort needed to convert the bestiary to 5e would take manpower and time, but why on Earth are they charging for the Pathfinder 1e conversion? The original was written in 1e. Every stat block is already done. Most, of not all, of the new monsters are on d20pfsrd. I could create a "conversion" bestiary in a day just buy ripping the stat blocks out of the original PDFs and pasting them into pagemaker. $35 for copy-pasted stats is ridiculous.


----------



## billd91 (May 12, 2019)

Remathilis said:


> Ok, I get the effort needed to convert the bestiary to 5e would take manpower and time, but why on Earth are they charging for the Pathfinder 1e conversion? The original was written in 1e. Every stat block is already done. Most, of not all, of the new monsters are on d20pfsrd. I could create a "conversion" bestiary in a day just buy ripping the stat blocks out of the original PDFs and pasting them into pagemaker. $35 for copy-pasted stats is ridiculous.




Assuming pasting stat blocks into Pagemaker is all it would take is the ridiculous part here.


----------



## Azzy (May 12, 2019)

Remathilis said:


> Ok, I get the effort needed to convert the bestiary to 5e would take manpower and time, but why on Earth are they charging for the Pathfinder 1e conversion? The original was written in 1e. Every stat block is already done. Most, of not all, of the new monsters are on d20pfsrd. I could create a "conversion" bestiary in a day just buy ripping the stat blocks out of the original PDFs and pasting them into pagemaker. $35 for copy-pasted stats is ridiculous.




Sure, if all they were doing were pasting them to an a Word document that you could download. But doing layout and having it look decent requires effort, then there's the whole bit about it being a hardback book which, if you expect that for free is ridiculous.


----------



## Remathilis (May 12, 2019)

Azzy said:


> Sure, if all they were doing were pasting them to an a Word document that you could download. But doing layout and having it look decent requires effort, then there's the whole bit about it being a hardback book which, if you expect that for free is ridiculous.



My point is that they aren't creating any new material here. It doesn't even need the 3.5 -> PF1 conversion that Rise of the Runelords needed. I don't expect them to give away a dead tree product for nothing, but is reformatting already done work worth the same amount as converting to a semi-compatible system like 5e?


----------



## billd91 (May 13, 2019)

Remathilis said:


> My point is that they aren't creating any new material here. It doesn't even need the 3.5 -> PF1 conversion that Rise of the Runelords needed. I don't expect them to give away a dead tree product for nothing, but is reformatting already done work worth the same amount as converting to a semi-compatible system like 5e?




Maybe you should re-read  the initial pitch, because there is going to be at least *some* new material. Not exactly sure how much...


----------



## Parmandur (May 13, 2019)

billd91 said:


> Maybe you should re-read  the initial pitch, because there is going to be at least *some* new material. Not exactly sure how much...




I think what he's saying is that a collection of the PF1 AP as an alternate option would be nice. Wouldn't be super useful for selling PF2, though.


----------



## TheSword (May 13, 2019)

They are taking elements from Owlcats Kingmaker game which is frankly pretty amazing. Particularly part two which is the weakest of them but ends up really good and dramatic.


----------



## Olaf the Stout (May 13, 2019)

mach1.9pants said:


> 'track record'? This is Paizo's first crowd funding effort, the previous ones were by (admittedly endorsed) 3PP. I can't see this doing anything but going well. But it will be all in retail, so not a huge problem -apart from the coins type stuff. You'll pay more but that's normal.




As S'mon said, the Goblinworks Kickstarters were totally all Paizo. I'm just guessing they were set up under a separate company for business purposes, so that if it failed (as it has), it didn't take the rest of Paizo down with it.


----------

