Nodachi Fred wrote:Arachnofiend wrote:Nodachi Fred wrote:I thought we already had a PF 2.0, though it's called by a different name: 5e.This would imply 5e is an evolution of the Pathfinder formula, rather than an entirely different take on the genre that's going to appeal to an entirely different set of people.
Did you see the extent to which D&D used their playtest as a formulary for what did and didn't make it into the game? Did you also notice, that the game itself, whether by coincidence or not (I happen to think not) addresses many of the "broken" complaints people have about Pathfinder? I'm not saying 5e is an evolution of Pathfinder. What I am saying, is that D&D 5e certainly took a look at the greater fanbase of fantasy themed RPGs and put out a product that addresses a lot of what those fans desire.
That, to me, is what a Pathfinder 2.0 would look like anyway.
If what the "greater fanbase" wants is a watered down system where every character of a given class is functionally identical then I'm glad to not be part of that mob.
I'm quite happy with Pathfinder. What you consider bloat I consider depth. You already have 5e for what you want, changing Pathfinder to be more like 5e just makes it so that I don't have what I want anymore.
Which brings me back to my original statement. Now if you go back and read it again, after reading what you just said here. I think you'll understand exactly what I meant.