Quote from: Shasarak;1098682Of course you think it is doing poorly.  If it was best seller for one week then it would fail your expectations because it was not best seller for 2 weeks.

Sure.  For me to consider Pathfinder 2 to be successful, I would expect them to take the #1 spot in RPGs for 2 months or so.  The 5th edition PHB was released in July of 2014, more than 5 full years ago.  If you've had five years to buy something and you haven't done so, you're not highly motivated to buy it.  

By contrast, Pathfinder 2 was released less than a month ago.  If people were highly motivated to buy the book, as one would expect from an eagerly anticipated new release you'd expect sales to spike.  After that initial spike, considering it is 5 years newer than 5th edition, you could get a sense of how well it is competing/winning converts based on how long it stays on top.  

I'm glad you like Pathfinder.  I hope you have fun.  Hopefully your fun doesn't depend on objective measures of success or popularity.  

I'm curious to see how a big release does, and what lessons the industry learns.  I don't expect Lisa Stevens to be frank if there are lessons learned and things that could have been done better, but I certainly hope she is.  

I didn't care much for Pathfinder despite being excited during the Alpha and Beta tests.  In fact, it was the way they handled feedback that was a big turn off.  I felt that they opted for higher levels of complexity unnecessarily.  I'm watching discussions of Pathfinder 2, and I feel like it was another step in that direction.

For example, grappling has been complex in a lot of games.  Currently, in Pathfinder 2, Grappling is an Athletics action (so it is described in the skill section, not the combat section).  It does have the 'attack' trait, so it is subject to the Multi-Attack Penalty (MAP).  If you succeed on a grapple the opponent gains the 'grabbed' condition.  If you want to do more than grab them, further Grapple checks don't necessarily help.  Instead, you need a critical success; than they will move from 'grabbed' to 'restrained'.  Feel free to correct my misunderstandings because I honestly don't care enough to read 600+ pages to see if I've missed something.  

That's more complexity than I want in my game at the moment.  I'm confident that they could have streamlined it significantly.  

So hey, you liked Pathfinder 1 and you think Pathfinder 2 is an improvement.  Good for you.

I personally don't feel like Pathfinder 1 improved enough compared to 3.x to make it worth switching for despite a sincere desire to support Paizo at the time.  I personally don't feel that doubling down on complexity was the right call now.  

I don't want to see Paizo fail - I actually like having more successful publishers in the industry!  This isn't me sitting here gloating because they're not doing well.  This is me observing and trying to read the signs to see what's happening.  I'm wondering if there is going to be a seismic shift in the hobby - and I'm not seeing it.  I think some Pathfinder players are switching to 2nd edition, and I think that there are a lot who aren't.  For Pathfinder 2 to be successful, it either needs to convert ALL of the existing Pathfinder fanbase or it needs to bring in new players.  I don't see it doing either.

I'm sorry that it offends you that I don't think it looks like it is doing well.  I'm certainly open to evidence to the contrary.  I don't think the quote you provided does much to dispel the perception.  I know that Paizo brought 10x as many Pathfinder 1 books as Beta Books to Gencon 2009 (I went in 2008) and I think they sold out.  I can't fathom why Lisa would have brought more books than they COULD have sold.  Not every sale is 1 book to 1 customer, so there's no reason they COULDN'T have sold out if there were bulk orders.  Likewise, even as a small operation it wouldn't have been difficult to add additional bodies to help with the sales.  To me, failure to sell out sounds like they didn't hit their own expectations.

I'm looking forward to what else we can discern over time.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1098690Sure.  For me to consider Pathfinder 2 to be successful, I would expect them to take the #1 spot in RPGs for 2 months or so.  The 5th edition PHB was released in July of 2014, more than 5 full years ago.  If you've had five years to buy something and you haven't done so, you're not highly motivated to buy it.  

By contrast, Pathfinder 2 was released less than a month ago.  If people were highly motivated to buy the book, as one would expect from an eagerly anticipated new release you'd expect sales to spike.  After that initial spike, considering it is 5 years newer than 5th edition, you could get a sense of how well it is competing/winning converts based on how long it stays on top.  

I'm glad you like Pathfinder.  I hope you have fun.  Hopefully your fun doesn't depend on objective measures of success or popularity.  

I'm curious to see how a big release does, and what lessons the industry learns.  I don't expect Lisa Stevens to be frank if there are lessons learned and things that could have been done better, but I certainly hope she is.  

I didn't care much for Pathfinder despite being excited during the Alpha and Beta tests.  In fact, it was the way they handled feedback that was a big turn off.  I felt that they opted for higher levels of complexity unnecessarily.  I'm watching discussions of Pathfinder 2, and I feel like it was another step in that direction.

For example, grappling has been complex in a lot of games.  Currently, in Pathfinder 2, Grappling is an Athletics action (so it is described in the skill section, not the combat section).  It does have the 'attack' trait, so it is subject to the Multi-Attack Penalty (MAP).  If you succeed on a grapple the opponent gains the 'grabbed' condition.  If you want to do more than grab them, further Grapple checks don't necessarily help.  Instead, you need a critical success; than they will move from 'grabbed' to 'restrained'.  Feel free to correct my misunderstandings because I honestly don't care enough to read 600+ pages to see if I've missed something.  

That's more complexity than I want in my game at the moment.  I'm confident that they could have streamlined it significantly.  

So hey, you liked Pathfinder 1 and you think Pathfinder 2 is an improvement.  Good for you.

I personally don't feel like Pathfinder 1 improved enough compared to 3.x to make it worth switching for despite a sincere desire to support Paizo at the time.  I personally don't feel that doubling down on complexity was the right call now.  

I don't want to see Paizo fail - I actually like having more successful publishers in the industry!  This isn't me sitting here gloating because they're not doing well.  This is me observing and trying to read the signs to see what's happening.  I'm wondering if there is going to be a seismic shift in the hobby - and I'm not seeing it.  I think some Pathfinder players are switching to 2nd edition, and I think that there are a lot who aren't.  For Pathfinder 2 to be successful, it either needs to convert ALL of the existing Pathfinder fanbase or it needs to bring in new players.  I don't see it doing either.

I'm sorry that it offends you that I don't think it looks like it is doing well.  I'm certainly open to evidence to the contrary.  I don't think the quote you provided does much to dispel the perception.  I know that Paizo brought 10x as many Pathfinder 1 books as Beta Books to Gencon 2009 (I went in 2008) and I think they sold out.  I can't fathom why Lisa would have brought more books than they COULD have sold.  Not every sale is 1 book to 1 customer, so there's no reason they COULDN'T have sold out if there were bulk orders.  Likewise, even as a small operation it wouldn't have been difficult to add additional bodies to help with the sales.  To me, failure to sell out sounds like they didn't hit their own expectations.

I'm looking forward to what else we can discern over time.

I am not offended that you think that Pathfinder 2 is not doing well.  I think that your criteria for "doing well" is nonsensical but it does not offend me or frankly even surprise me.  Its like seeing Razor 007 or GeekyBugle give Pathfinder 2 a failing grade - is it Tuesday already?

If you had any experience in business then you would understand that selling out of a product is probably the worst thing that could happen because it means that you have missed out on all of the sales that you could have made if you had printed enough stock.  Selling out sounds good but what about all of those potential Starfinder players that could not buy because they sold out on Friday?  Thats not good business.  

Just for interest I had a look at the top selling books and I see that Pathfinder 2 is 69th and the 5e Players Handbook is 96th.  That does put doubt on your whole initial premise.  So has the sales algorithm changed, were you wrong, did you even bother looking?  I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt.

You should look.  

Right now - roughly 5 hours after I posted - Pathfinder is ahead of the D&D 5th edition Player's Handbook.  

Is there any 'historical information' that we can look at?

Quote from: Shasarak;1098706If you had any experience in business then you would understand that selling out of a product is probably the worst thing that could happen

True normally; not really true of Convention sales since you have to cart the books there & back; most retailers hate the 'back' bit. Plus there is the propaganda value for a publisher of "we sold out!", The usual aim for cons is to sell out late on the last day of the convention. I expect that's what they were going for. It makes no sense to take "more than we could possibly sell".

Quote from: S'mon;1098756True normally; not really true of Convention sales since you have to cart the books there & back; most retailers hate the 'back' bit. Plus there is the propaganda value for a publisher of "we sold out!", The usual aim for cons is to sell out late on the last day of the convention. I expect that's what they were going for.

That sounds great if you are the worker that has to pack up everything at the end of the Con.

QuoteIt makes no sense to take "more than we could possibly sell".

Honest question S'mon, how many books do you bring to "sell out late on the last day of the convention"?

For my money it is easier to bring more books then you could possibly sell then it is to try and aim for that mythical "sold out but not on Friday" number.

Besides you realise that Paizo is a publishing company, yes?  Any books they dont sell at Gencon just get taken back to their warehouse to be sold online or sent to their distributor anyway.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1098714You should look.  

Right now - roughly 5 hours after I posted - Pathfinder is ahead of the D&D 5th edition Player's Handbook.  

There you go, first week of sales and Pathfinder 2 still outselling 5th Edition.  How long until that success goal post gets moved?  3, 2, 1

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1098714You should look.  

Right now - roughly 5 hours after I posted - Pathfinder is ahead of the D&D 5th edition Player's Handbook.  

Is there any 'historical information' that we can look at?

I checked Amazon's bestsellers in Gaming just now and D&D is #1, Pathfinder is #2. It'll likely change again.

I'd love to see weekly sales ranks, rather than hourly.  Still seems to me that a failure to maintain the number #1 spot is a bad sign for Paizo.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1098840I'd love to see weekly sales ranks, rather than hourly.  Still seems to me that a failure to maintain the number #1 spot is a bad sign for Paizo.

Didn't Starfinder actually outsell D&D5e for awhile after release? Or am I mis-remembering?

I'm late to party. Did PF2 slaughter any sacred cows in need of slaughtering or did it just tweak some parts of the experience while leaving a bunch of the other big underlying issues untouched? From where I'm standing, we still have sacred cows like separate armor class and reflex saves, martial caster disparity, the Christmas tree effect, min-maxing, and nonsensical alignment. 4e fixed problems like that over a decade ago to great success until Wizards reversed every good decision they made for reasons I can never hope to understand. Fantasy Craft, Trailblazer, 13th Age and countless other retroclones and 3pp introduce amazing helpful innovations that Wizards and Paizo completely ignore.

Why are Wizards and Paizo so resistant to improving their rules? Why does the community not demand better?

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1098894I'm late to party. Did PF2 slaughter any sacred cows in need of slaughtering or did it just tweak some parts of the experience while leaving a bunch of the other big underlying issues untouched? From where I'm standing, we still have sacred cows like separate armor class and reflex saves, martial caster disparity, the Christmas tree effect, min-maxing, and nonsensical alignment. 4e fixed problems like that over a decade ago to great success until Wizards reversed every good decision they made for reasons I can never hope to understand. Fantasy Craft, Trailblazer, 13th Age and countless other retroclones and 3pp introduce amazing helpful innovations that Wizards and Paizo completely ignore.

Why are Wizards and Paizo so resistant to improving their rules? Why does the community not demand better?

The first article lists these 'problems':

Attribute Bonuses
Wizard Spells (Vancian Casting)
Monks
Saving Throws
Armor Class
Annoying Deaths
Too Many Spellcasters
Power Gaming
Alignment
Magic Items

All of those are still in Pathfinder 2.  I don't think his criticism of Saving Throws is entirely fair, nor do I think claiming that 'all spellcasters using the same basic rules' indicates too many spellcasters.  

The second article  lists these 'problems':

Classes aren't balanced
Class specializations aren't balanced
Gear Grind is worse than ever
Easy to fail character generation
Physics Issues Persist
Building an Encounter is Hard

There are a lot of classes that aren't out yet, and Paizo fans seem to think it is because they haven't had a chance to properly balance them.  Personally, I don't think that it LOOKS like there's been an effort to balance options appropriately, but that's something that's hard to say definitively without a lot of play testing.  I think the physics issues that it has are different from 5th edition, and they somewhat derive from the way actions are allocated.  My impression is that all of these remain something of a problem with probably 'building an encounter' the closest to being solved.  I'm interested in other people's takes on these for sure.

The third article lists these 'problems' (only referring to magic):

Some spells have daily limits, but it is inconsistent
Spell Slots
Different Flavor, Same Mechanics
Magic is 'safe'
Magic is everywhere

I don't know that 'magic being safe' is necessarily a problem - if you want people to make a wizard and survive to high levels, they can't be carted off to hell by a demon they just summoned very often.  In my opinion, the game doesn't solve any of these.  The 'different flavor, same mechanics' is complex and OUTSIDE of magic, I think Pathfinder 2 has a lot going on but WITHIN magic, I think this is probably generally true.

I can say this regarding experience in business, selling out is never the worst thing to happen,  every small business knows (and really every business) the worst thing to have and what kills you, is inventory that does not move.  I hope PF2 does well, but I think they may have missed their window to become what looked to me a few years a possible juggernaut.  I have no idea how their profit and loss sheet looks like, I hope they didn't extend too far and I hope they do well.  Pf1 didn't grab my attention, and PF2 did not change in ways to make me buy it, but full disclose I only play one game that is D20 (DCC) so they would have to do something special to have brought me in.  I think that is their weakness right now, they are unable to draw in the players D&D resurgence (and the folks d&d has brought back to table top) has created.  IME people like to look around for alternatives to the first game.  PF seems to have gone from having nostalgia as its biggest strength to now looking like an imitation of the big kid on the block.

Quote from: oggsmash;1098896I can say this regarding experience in business, selling out is never the worst thing to happen,  every small business knows (and really every business) the worst thing to have and what kills you, is inventory that does not move...

This. Selling out and keeping up with demand is the kind of problem businesses want to have.

And no business wants to have to cart back inventory from any convention/trade show. Ever.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1098894I'm late to party. Did PF2 slaughter any sacred cows in need of slaughtering or did it just tweak some parts of the experience while leaving a bunch of the other big underlying issues untouched??

My Advice. Don't play PF2/D&D.

Plenty of other fantasy games out there.

If Pazio/PF2 started slaughtering sacred cows they would ensure that PF2 would fail.

If WOTC starts slaughtering sacred cows they are in for another 4e backlash.

Because:

 

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1098894.... Fantasy Craft, Trailblazer, 13th Age and countless other retroclones and 3pp introduce amazing helpful innovations that Wizards and Paizo completely ignore.

Why are Wizards and Paizo so resistant to improving their rules? Why does the community not demand better?

Because the Hobby, wants their D&D the way they want it. And they want it to be just like it was before, only better.

Get it?

We all saw what happened with 4e. WOTC has to walk a fine line with its future editions lest they have a situation like 4e where they get outsold by a clone.

Here is Amazon pricing history data:



RPG Best Sellers List:

First review I've read from someone not gifted the rules, from Jester David (who I tend to like on a variety of forums, though we certainly don't always agree).