Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="transmission89" data-source="post: 8239080" data-attributes="member: 6688441">Yup, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander here.I’d disagree with the binary idea you’re presenting here of either a defined skill system or playing fast and loose. There is room in between as no matter how comprehensive a games system, there will always be areas not covered by the rules. This involves improv and adaptation from all participants at the table.I can understand you have problems with the PF2 game. There are somethings about it you have problems with. In particular, in this thread, you’re discussing some of the ambiguities around the hazards and such right? Like how are the players supposed to know how to do x or the GM to run x without this missing critical information?So, using the 5e DMG as your sole resource, explain how to run a dungeon crawl procedure with the activities that can be taken by the players (Please also mention the more robust hazard system included that Paizo clearly failed with here).I can save you the effort though. You can’t, because the 5e DMG massively falls down here. Were I to adopt your argument, this would be the point I’d label it a complete failure of a system. I also suspect you’ll then critique the ”relativism” here again and how this frustrates you, as you are wont to do. but, and I’m gonna let you finish... you yourself do this every time you critique PF2 by making reference to 5e and a “post 5e world”. If you don’t want people to draw comparison, or constantly point out that Paizo were not interested in looking at 5e for design (thus meaning it can’t be a failure on those terms as that was never their success criteria), it’d behoove you to not constantly create the comparison yourself.Rest assured, this is, as with magic, an attack on the argument because, as I’ve highlighted here, when you draw the logical conclusions from your assertions, they apply quite heavily to something you are contrasting it against.</blockquote>

Verification