Unpopular opinions go here

[Alzrius]

Paizo should have had Starfinder 1E use the same rules as Pathfinder 1E, instead of a near-variant that was just different enough that it couldn't be easily converted on the fly. The fact that they're having Starfinder 2E use the Pathfinder Remastered (or as I like to call it, Pathfinder 2.5E) rules strikes me as them coming to that realization several years late.

 

[Maxperson]

Crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentation of their women really is what's best in life.

Wrong! It's...

Hot water, good dentishtry and shoft lavatory paper.

 

[Maxperson]

The biggest difference between Paladins and Clerics is that the Paladin is first and foremost intended to be an Inspiring Leader of People, hence the stupendous Charisma requirement while needing only enough Int and Wis to get by. Clerics, on the other hand, are intended to be the voice of wise reason* and act as support crew and diviners - Wisdom is their prime stat and they don't need much Charisma at all.

Put another way, a Paladin leads from the front while a Cleric supports from the middle or rear, and the mechanics kinda reflect that.

* - in theory. Mileage may vary considerably in practice.

The biggest difference is that the paladin is the sword arm of the church. The holy warrior. A cleric is first and foremost a priest. That he happens to be decent at fighting is besides the point.

 

[CleverNickName]

This is very much a case where the metaphor is badly broken due to the metaphorical material being far more time sensitive than the item it supposedly represents.

Most food metaphors have similar, if less profound, situations...

The metaphor is fine.

Even when I lived in Colorado, we made sushi at home all the time. All you gotta do is ask the guy behind the counter for "sushi-grade" fish. Or stick to cooked options like Cali rolls, shrimp nigiri, and spider rolls. (shrug) Sushi isn't hard.

 

[Reynard]

Paizo should have had Starfinder 1E use the same rules as Pathfinder 1E, instead of a near-variant that was just different enough that it couldn't be easily converted on the fly. The fact that they're having Starfinder 2E use the Pathfinder Remastered (or as I like to call it, Pathfinder 2.5E) rules strikes me as them coming to that realization several years late.

Emphasis mine. That bit suggests it wasn't a terrible idea after all. It just happens that thing have been changing and now they are trying something new.

Unpopular Opinion: Just because a person, company, whatever changes something, it doesn't mean the original thing was bad.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't need mechanics in 1e D&D to differentiate these two Fighters at the table. They're the same level, both single-class, with the only real mechanical difference being that one is weapon-spec'ed and the other isn't. I've been playing them both on and off for well over 35 years, and both are still active:

That's great for you, but its very much not true of me and I'm not alone.

 

[Jd Smith1]

You're welcome.

But that's the thing about this. I think that Tolkien, for example, would be appalled that D&D's wizard, which is modeled after Gandalf, Merlin, and other magical characters, would be defined by their Intelligence rather than say their Wisdom, which was often the hallmark characteristic for these sagely figures. They were meant to be the source of wisdom.

True. Plus their wanton use of magic. Gandalf actually employed very little magic.

 

[Jd Smith1]

The metaphor is fine.

Even when I lived in Colorado, we made sushi at home all the time. All you gotta do is ask the guy behind the counter for "sushi-grade" fish. Or stick to cooked options like Cali rolls, shrimp nigiri, and spider rolls. (shrug) Sushi isn't hard.

We make sushi here, too. But we call it 'bait'.

 

[payn]

Just changing the font of the rulebook is enough for some folks to call it a .5 edition.

 

[Faolyn]

All the classes are designed around combat. Some of them might be useful outside of combat, but each and every one of them is designed for a fight.

OK, yeah. But you have to admit, it's possible to create a non-combat-based caster (just don't take damaging spells!) and often very difficult to get non-combat mechanics out of anyone else.