5E isn't CSI, it is Breaking Bad.
Not in a million years. I get the point you are going for, but just...no.

5E isn't CSI, it is Breaking Bad.
I am not trying to make claims about comparative quality. My personal opinion is that both Fifth Edition and Pathfinder Second Edition are excellent designs that do what they set out to do.
Again I am not making claims that one game is superior to another. I think they do different things well and am largely glad we have both.
Not in a million years. I get the point you are going for, but just...no.![]()
Just in terms of social positioning. Substitute a hip, successful Cable or Streaming show of your choice to complete the analogy.
Baywatch was very popular back in the day...![]()
Wow, are you ever bending over backwards to make sure nothing you say comes off as critical of 5e...on the Pathfinder section of the site, no less!
The game is crunchier than D&D 5e, but more streamlined than PF1. It's not as onerous as many critics suggest, and not difficult at all to learn. The keywords seem daunting at first, but are all clearly explained in the excellent index/glossary. It's got a lot of flavour, that I hope doesn't get lost by players assuming more complexity than is actually there.
It has more feats, a few more moving parts in terms of differing numbers for proficiencies in different areas. There are a few more class features and choices. There are more options in combat. It's not that much more complicated than 5e, despite the criticisms.How would you define "Crunchier"?
Paizo also had an extremely bad habit of not listening to feedback at all. A lot of their supplements included classes designed as they are because the developers thought they knew best. And the supplements were pretty bad because of it.