What if the whole "good guy goblin" thing is Paizo's way of explaining the Gap in Starfinder lore? Hear me out, the whole thing is part of the BBEG (Big Bad Evil Goblin)'s plan to destroy all knowledge and writing on Golarian. Obviously that's a big task, and one that would be borderline impossible with a direct approach. So instead, he decided to brainwash goblins into sleeper agents, to infiltrate the dirty readers society, get in their good graces, start working in their libraries. All building up to the grand moment he activates the agents to destroy EVERYTHING!
So you would just remove the option for people to understand that they are doing things that don't fit in with the campaign? Because other than expending resources that you could have used to better your character, that's what atonements are: opportunities for a player to understand what kind of campaign is being run and how they can fit in it. And it still doesn't give anyone a visible line not to cross. Reminders are important, and you don't address that, at least in a manner I find satisfactory.
I disagree with the idea that occasional mild evil act don't fit in the campaign. To clarify my stance, I don't think anything that currently is the level of alignment infraction that isn't enough to directly remove a character from the campaign is enough to warrant anything (unless the actions are excessive in number, have nothing to do with the adventure at hand, or are to provoke another player.) Also the atonement is at worst a minor inconvenience.
Yes, people will behave like jerks no matter what the piece of paper says or what I might say, and people will still get banned for behavior that isn't acceptable in our society, but that doesn't mean I need to provide them with a vehicle for their shenanigans. I mean, I can still run over people drunk, but if I only have a bicycle, it becomes more difficult for me to do harm. And that's what I believe we are trying to accomplish, make it difficult for someone to engage in the behavior, or make the endeavor so blatant that we can nip it in the bud.
Like I said, by that logic you might as well ban all alignments other than NG. It's like saying that because someone might drive drunk we should ban all cars.
I can understand that you might be frustrated with the lack of character options this can lead to, but if PF2 ends up with the same spread of options as PF1, I think you have plenty of other options to make up for your loss.
I realize I am by no mean short of character options (I have at least 20 ideas that I want to do, a quarter of which I might get to before PF2.)
With that said, I'm happy to read that you are capable of roleplaying characters who toe that line. But just because you can do it does not mean everyone else can, and you are looking to enable those options not just for you, but for people who may cause a lot of harm because they aren't capable of operating with that much freedom.
This is why I think removing/loosing alignment restrictions is a good compromise.
And finally, if we keep the same restrictions, how is that "roleplaying freedom" that was pushed as the main reason behind allowing LE going to even work? You want to roleplay evil but you aren't allowed to roleplay evil because of the restrictions. At that point, one would just be a gelded, edgier version of LN.
A) I'm more interested in the character options locked by alignment personally.
B) I can and do roleplay borderline evil characters, they just know that they have to behave themselves to some degree because Zarta or Gureil, or Torch told them to.
Furthermore, if we keep the complete restriction on evil acts that we have, how do we tell someone that they are retired? How do we tell them they need an atonement? Right now the limit is "if you shift to an evil alignment, you atone or you are done". How does that even begin to work with evil alignments allowed?
"The Decimverate would like a word with you" and they're never seen again. I hate the atone or die rule, you're either bad enough that you need to be removed or your just another agent.
people still being given a license to behave like jerks.
People are going to be jerks without an E on their character sheet, this argument does nothing for me, and the "just playing my character" argument could apply to every alignment other then maybe NG
My phone is about to die, but I will respond to the last point later.
Your defense would suffer a lot and the classes are built off of using Dex
Not really, your primary defense (parry) works the same str or dex. (idk if you could parry an enemy 5ft away in reach, id guess no, another issue with the feat, but that's a problem dex has the same as str). Also if you go str you can dip into fighter or paladin and use heavy armor, all you'd lose is nimble.
Edit: they also can't use dodging panache in heavy armor
Every response I receive is just another argument that my opinion based on facts, experience, and theory is just wrong.
The thing is it about a dozen people telling you there experience contradicts you opinion, not just one.
Edit: theres also nothing stopping a gunslinger from using a bow other than a s$&&ty strength score for the rare scenario you are 100ft+ from your target
You are basically saying "I like Fallout, but I don't like Zelda. Why isn't Zelda more like Fallout?" instead of finding more games like Fallout that you would enjoy.
There are plenty of ways to find games that you would enjoy, just go talk to your pfs organizers, people at the shop(s) they play at, groups online etc. There are plenty of people who like what you like, just go find them and let us enjoy our Zelda :)