Paizo is releasing their three part Pathfinder 2E adventure Abomination Vaults this September, in a hard cover compilation statted for 5th edition D&D. Interesting questions are raised....such as:
1. Is this purely an experiment to see how the interest in their adventure paths fares when presented to the much broader audience of D&D 5th edition?
2. Or, is this at least partially motivated by slower Pathfinder 2E sales, and a need to broaden the market in which Paizo publishes?
I'm inclined to think #2. Pathfinder 2E still seems to have a narrower share of the market than Pathfinder 1E, going by VTT reports such as Orr Group provides on Roll20, and both editions of Pathfinder combined pale in comparison to the marketshare D&D currently owns.
Pathfinder 2E suffers from specific design issues, which (like D&D 4E also had problems with) are not so much flaws as they are limits of scope. I've gone over this problem in prior posts....with the caveat that I really enjoy playing the game....but PF2E was a tight and careful design for a specific type of player. D&D 4E suffered from the same limits (though some was likely a misguided push to market more saleable products like minis, cards, maps and such), but ultimately D&D 4E felt like it was designed for groups who exclusively used maps and minis and focused heavily on combat. Pathfinder 2E, similarly, has a deep focus on player limitations, extreme math balance, and a skill system hampered severely by a design philosophy which often consolidated and tightened skills that were useful for parsing out non-mechanical differentiators amongst characters rather than just balancing it all against a defined range. This has led to, among other things, the skill feats being a general nightmare for more casual groups who want a more flexible and open playstyle, and skills like Society becoming the dump skill for literally every action imaginable since so many otherwise unrelated skills were all dumped in to it.
Ironically both 4E and PF2E also focused on making the DM's life easier and both did a good job on that. But...guess what....D&D 5E also made the DM's job easier, too, without hamstringing the players in the process.
D&D 5E is like a theme park where you buy one ticket and can then go on any ride, in whatever order you want. Pathfinder 2E is like a theme park where you must get in line and follow the path. You are only allowed to deviate in certain ways, and if the ride senses you are having too much fun it stops. But it is easier to operate!
Anyway, it will be interesting to see how the 5E edition of Abomination Vaults sells. I suspect it will surprise Paizo, a lot, and we should expect more 5E adaptations next year as a result.
I've seen a couple of videos speculating on this move by Paizo.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIKQBcIOaxA&t=628s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5rv3Hfmq8c
I haven't read any of Pathfinder 2, but what you're describing reminds of the Alpha version of Pathfinder 1. Players would have to take attack abilities in order with increasing levels. They were a bit like video game combos.
It's odd that they went back to railroading character development, since the attack combos were immediately eliminated in the beta version by player demand.
I didn't experience the PF1E playtest, but it's clear the PF2E playtest was dominated by GMs who wanted to put uppity players in their place....an overzealous goal of eliminating interesting synergies and combos made PF2E less exciting for the players, who struggle to feel special when playing the game. GMs (like me) can't complain because the game is very GM friendly, and the tension combat creates is great, but that consistent tension is at the expense of players getting to do anything cool except against woefully under leveled opponents....the math is just too tight.
DeleteI'm sure there is some degree of #1, but the driving factor has to be #2. The potential network effect of having a highly popular adventure path be exclusive to your system is nothing to be sneezed at -- unless you don't have a choice.
ReplyDeleteI've long argued that during the Pathfinder RPG era Paizo lost their way. They stopped being about awesome settings and stories and started being about mechanics, which worked great as long as WotC keep driving D&D into ditches. However, when 5E brought that to an end, Paizo had backed themselves into a size (and cost structure) that is unsustainable when their main products is a distant 2nd to D&D. Now that the "new edition" sales surge has faded, the financials probably aren't lining up. I'm sure the pandemic hasn't helped either.
I'll be very interested to see where Paizo winds up in the next 24-36 months. Whatever the results of this experiment, I suspect big changes will soon be afoot.
Agreed....some other interesting recent observations: Paizo has so far only announced 2 more hard covers for PF2E this year, and only one more for Starfinder. Starfinder's hardcover lineup is moving to pocket editions later this year, as well. I wonder if that means they are winding down that line, or if they plan to release a revised edition eventually....or if, like the PF2E pocket editions, these are just proving to have some traction among existing fans who buy up multiple copies in different formats (like me, guilty as charged).
DeleteI'd suggest Paizo could hold out for D&D's 5.5 edition release and position themselves for some marketshare when that happens, but their only real differentiator from D&D these days is the extra mechanical complexity so....yeah, time will tell.