Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8745987" data-attributes="member: 18">I dunno if that's true.Remember lineage? And how it went back to being race?Pathfinder 2E is kind of the &quot;mine canary&quot; here. People who like D&amp;D-ish games but are more &quot;right-on&quot; are often PF2 fans/boosters, because, frankly, PF2 has done a better job with diversity/modernity etc. Part of this is having a specific setting - Golarion - which they were able to update timeline-wise to get rid of stuff they didn't like. Part of it is that their core team is I believe more diverse and certainly has better instincts than WotC on this kind of thing. I don't think WotC are less committed to be clear, but they're not doing as well (even with this playtest they misstepped on half-races and by assigning languages to jobs - even I, only mildly &quot;woke&quot; (due to my 44-year-old decrepitude) when &quot;UH OH&quot; when I saw the languages assigned to jobs thing).Anyway, whatever, point is they're basically a couple of years ahead, minimum, of where WotC is (at least for the last few years).And they still have Barbarians and Monks (even still called that). I also don't see much discussion on left-RPG-Twitter of Barbarian anymore. A few years ago people were like &quot;Omg so problematic!&quot;. Now it seems almost like it's been accepted as a class-name not connected to real-world stuff (not sure that's quite right...). I dunno if that'll stick but...Worth noting PF2 Monks aren't forced-Shaolin Monks like 5E though - that's one option among many due to the way PF2 uses Feats (which ends up being more like Warlock Eldritch Invocations than D&amp;D's Feats).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8745987, member: 18"] I dunno if that's true. Remember lineage? And how it went back to being race? Pathfinder 2E is kind of the "mine canary" here. People who like D&D-ish games but are more "right-on" are often PF2 fans/boosters, because, frankly, PF2 has done a better job with diversity/modernity etc. Part of this is having a specific setting - Golarion - which they were able to update timeline-wise to get rid of stuff they didn't like. Part of it is that their core team is I believe more diverse and certainly has better instincts than WotC on this kind of thing. I don't think WotC are less committed to be clear, but they're not doing as well (even with this playtest they misstepped on half-races and by assigning languages to jobs - even I, only mildly "woke" (due to my 44-year-old decrepitude) when "UH OH" when I saw the languages assigned to jobs thing). Anyway, whatever, point is they're basically a couple of years ahead, minimum, of where WotC is (at least for the last few years). And they still have Barbarians and Monks (even still called that). I also don't see much discussion on left-RPG-Twitter of Barbarian anymore. A few years ago people were like "Omg so problematic!". Now it seems almost like it's been accepted as a class-name not connected to real-world stuff (not sure that's quite right...). I dunno if that'll stick but... Worth noting PF2 Monks aren't forced-Shaolin Monks like 5E though - that's one option among many due to the way PF2 uses Feats (which ends up being more like Warlock Eldritch Invocations than D&D's Feats). [/QUOTE]

Verification