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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7589626" data-attributes="member: 12731">Remember - what I suggest Paizo do is chuck out this entire feat-centric approach and start over from scratch; going for a ruleset that actually examines what 5E does well and makes sure none of that is left out: martial-caster equality, spell balance, easy NPC building. Then on top of that, fixes or patches what 5E doesn't do nearly as well: detailed PC building, magic item economy. In that context: yes, it is.What we don't need is another game saddled with all of the core d20 deficiencies without any real d20 compatibility. We already have 3rd edition and Pathfinder. What is the PF2 playtest really adding? To us gamers, that is. (That the game is adding value to Paizo by offering true independence of WotC's D&D IP is for certain)It would be so refreshing if Paizo acknowledged that 5E truly solves a couple of decades-old issues where sacredcowism previously prevented true progress. It feels so sad to regress to a point before this moment. I fear gamers have moved on, and no longer put up with the crap of editions past regarding these issues: DMs being expected to spend hours on NPCs that lives for rounds, fighters and rogues being utterly eclipsed by magic users......even stuff I personally don't subscribe to, such as the way 5E does away with Strength as the martial's primary ability allowing young people to be those special snowflakes that are gorgeous and moody and nimble and still just as deadly.That the feats-as-building-blocks approach makes for an impenetrable reading experience isn't helping.</blockquote>

Verification