Kurviak
Explorer
Not when the topic of discussion is Pathfinder 2E, and whether or not it will do to Paizo what 4E did to WotC.
Using wildly different rules for PCs and monsters is a strong shift away from Simulationism and toward Gamism, and one of the major reasons why 4E died so horribly was that much of their target audience was not on-board with that shift. D&D players, at least in the 3E-era, wanted rules that told us how the world was supposed to work. While you could make an argument that this is no longer true of current D&D players, it should still be true of Pathfinder 1E fans, which means they will remain highly resistant to that sort of change. Ergo, Pathfinder 2E is making exactly the same mistake that D&D 4E made, by mis-judging their audience.
That’s your opinion, I like PF1 a lot, I’ve been a GM for it for a wile and as much as I love the game I dislike a lot of it, and one of the things I dislike most is the futility of the time investment for fighting encounter building, mostly in regards of adversaries creation. At the end I’m mostly forced to use creatures and NPCs taken verbatim from the manuals to be able to prepare for the session and even then is more complex to understand the build stats than it should be to run effectively