Acolyte of Zothique
Adventurer
I gotta say, I intensely disagree with the notion that PF2 has no audience. Much of the original Pathfinder audience will no doubt find PF2 satisfactory, and that number will increase with time as more options become available, and people finish old campaigns and transition to new content.
And then there is the group that was interested in a crunchier, more detailed game than 5e, but found PF1 clunky, inconsistent, and at times intimidating. How is it not a good options for a more considered complex option than 5e?
More than that, I find you incredibly disingenuous, CapnZapp. I find PF2 as a rules engine to be genuinely better written then 5e, with a few exceptions that don't noticeably detract from the whole, imo. You state that
Which is not only false, but is actually more true of 5e!
You talk a ton of naughty word on PF2 with little proof to back it up. To say that Chargen is inflexible, especially when compared to the likes of 5e, is laughable at best, and slander at worst. Your class has a lot of identity, but that identity is incredibly flexible and allows for quite a lot of variation, even at level 1. With the exception of the Alchemist, which they kind of bungled imo, most of your feat choices matter and give you wider breadth of abilities, or improve in areas on which you want to focus. Not window dressing in the slightest, but build choices of which there are not clear best choices. Induvidually, they offer smaller but important bonuses or abilities that add up to make your character far more distinct from each other than 5e could ever even dream of.
I'd like to cover your points bit by bit, but I'm at work and don't have the time to do so, but rest assured I find your criticism against the feats and "fiddly bits" to be shallow and unsubstantive, and misleading to any souls who wonder onto this topic.
It sounds like you either never looked at the rules in-depth, or are intentionally misrepresenting the rules because you have a clear bone to pick with PF2 not just being 5.5e. 5e has many problems, and after DMing it for basically the whole time it's been available, they are grinding on me, and I find the system uninspiring, at this point.
Well it sounds like you are seriously biased against 5e because it doesn't work for you. This doesn't help your argument for PF2E; how does attacking 5e in your response above help in any way? A poster has stated his issues with PF2E; can they not be addressed without dragging in adversarial views on 5e? Addressing someone else's opinions by naughty word talking another game they play and you don't like? Really?
Honestly, why can't people make their points about one game without resorting to attacking/denigrating another?