Not that a critical mass of people now have their books, I want to ask a general question.
Is Pathfinder 2 a better game then its predicessor Pathfinder 1?
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Comparing like to like (i.e. the CRB and Bestiary 1 of each), I don't think there is even a question.
But one game has 10 years of supporting material and you can't catch up to that in 1000 pages.
|
| 20 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not that a critical mass of people now have their books, I want to ask a general question.
Is Pathfinder 2 a better game then its predicessor Pathfinder 1?
Ask me in about a year. First impressions are good and everything but it takes time to tell how good a game actually is
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Comparing like to like (i.e. the CRB and Bestiary 1 of each), I don't think there is even a question.
But that is the exact question I am asking: Is PF2 worth my money?
Captain Morgan's thread has devolved to the point that it is no longer useful for this purpose. :(
But one game has 10 years of supporting material and you can't catch up to that in 1000 pages.
No, you can't. That is an unfair comparison.
| 20 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just like PF1 the rules will be available online free on the archive. If money is tight I suggest you try running a one off there before you invest in physical books.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Depends on what (if anything) you think is wrong with PF1.
Speaking for myself, I think PF1 is drowning under the weight of all the supplements, player companions and subsystems introduced over a 10 year run so I'm looking forward to running PF2.
I think it is but time will tell.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
If money is tight, just read up on Archive of Nethys and decide for yourself. It's all going to be available for free tomorrow.
No one else is better equipped to tell you if it is worth *your* money than you are, given you don't actually have to buy it to get the full rules.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Comparing like to like (i.e. the CRB and Bestiary 1 of each), I don't think there is even a question.But that is the exact question I am asking: Is PF2 worth my money?
But one game has 10 years of supporting material and you can't catch up to that in 1000 pages.No, you can't. That is an unfair comparison.
My opinion (having played largely playtest adventures and having read through the rules in fair depth, and answered many questions on a random thread to get exposure to the things I wasn't thinking about, but not played with the final rules yet): I think so. It's both worth your money and appears to be built on a much better foundation than PF1, and I have literally every core rulebook for PF1 and got the original core rules with a subscription when it first launched. I've spent a long time with PF1, and I wrapped up a fun series of adventures to start running the playtest and have no real intent to look back.
However, if your budget is that tight, I have two suggestions:
- One, the PDFs for the Core Rulebook and Bestiary are $15 each, and will conveniently be updated for every new printing. As the game sprawls into tons of books, PDFs rapidly become more convenient for me anyway.
- Two, the SRD will be up and running tomorrow at Archives of Nethys, and you can judge the system and rules for yourself. You'll lose out on the art and book layout and all that (which are both good), but the rules will be there, and those are what sustain a system.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why not ask this instead from the get go? Because I don't think the other question will provide you a good answer, especially since you didn't provide any criterea for what you mean with "better". I think PF2 is "better" because it is much easier to run. Another person might find PF1 "better" because of all the choices available.
Defining what you are looking for and what you mean with "better" will raise the chances that you'll get usable and meaningful feedback. If you don't, it will probably devolve into why rarities are a plight, or something like that.
By the rules, yes, I'd say so. The engine alone is rebuilt to do what it originally wanted to do, and seeks to address the inherent (and ancient) flaws of the old 3.x engine. This is just based on the playtest; the final version looks to be even better, but I'll know more tomorrow.
Keeping in mind, the answer to your question and will always be purely subjective.
Depends on what (if anything) you think is wrong with PF1.
I think the real problems end up being:
1 - Class Tiers (there is a point when casters become simply better then other classes).2 - Mandatory "options" being required to function effectively in your class's ecological niche - and the adventure material being adjusted to that new balance.
3 - Poor balancing of the later material.
Defining what you are looking for and what you mean with "better" will raise the chances that you'll get usable and meaningful feedback. If you don't, it will probably devolve into why rarities are a plight, or something like that.
This is what I believe happened in Captain Morgan's thread. :(
However, if your budget is that tight, I have two suggestions:
- One, the PDFs for the Core Rulebook and Bestiary are $15 each, and will conveniently be updated for every new printing. As the game sprawls into tons of books, PDFs rapidly become more convenient for me anyway.
- Two, the SRD will be up and running tomorrow at Archives of Nethys, and you can judge the system and rules for yourself. You'll lose out on the art and book layout and all that (which are both good), but the rules will be there, and those are what sustain a system.
You're not the first to suggest these, and I think they are good options, especially the PDF route until the errata can be folded in.
Depends on what (if anything) you think is wrong with PF1.I think the real problems end up being:
1 - Class Tiers (there is a point when casters become simply better then other classes).
2 - Mandatory "options" being required to function effectively in your class's ecological niche - and the adventure material being adjusted to that new balance.
3 - Poor balancing of the later material.
I think all three are absolutely better, but the last one is by default as there is no "later material" yet.
I think all three are absolutely better, but the last one is by default as there is no "later material" yet.Depends on what (if anything) you think is wrong with PF1.I think the real problems end up being:
1 - Class Tiers (there is a point when casters become simply better then other classes).
2 - Mandatory "options" being required to function effectively in your class's ecological niche - and the adventure material being adjusted to that new balance.
3 - Poor balancing of the later material.
But, I could solve that problem by disallowing material I think is "broken."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But, I could solve that problem by disallowing material I think is "broken."I think all three are absolutely better, but the last one is by default as there is no "later material" yet.Depends on what (if anything) you think is wrong with PF1.I think the real problems end up being:
1 - Class Tiers (there is a point when casters become simply better then other classes).
2 - Mandatory "options" being required to function effectively in your class's ecological niche - and the adventure material being adjusted to that new balance.
3 - Poor balancing of the later material.
Hey, you set up the parameters; I'm just giving feedback. I think there's less chance of broken material disrupting the game because the foundations of the math are better defined, so it's harder to get the cumulative pile-up of unintended consequences that was often the cause of balance issues in PF1. Conveniently, super cool overpowered stuff has a defined place in the game with the rarity system, so things like artifacts or world-threatening magic can still exist, even at low levels. If there's a specific type of magic or item that's likely to disrupt a game, there's a good chance it's already considered uncommon, so it's not even an assumption that players will easily get it outside of some narrow concept where it's intended to be used.
PF1 was a system that was a slog for me to prepare for and run, but I still loved the customizability. PF2 has fewer options than PF1 (after 10 years), but still feels like there's plenty to customize when designing a character build, which is not the feeling I get when I have picked up or played other class-based systems.
Hey, you set up the parameters; I'm just giving feedback.But, I could solve that problem by disallowing material I think is "broken."I think all three are absolutely better, but the last one is by default as there is no "later material" yet.Depends on what (if anything) you think is wrong with PF1.I think the real problems end up being:
1 - Class Tiers (there is a point when casters become simply better then other classes).
2 - Mandatory "options" being required to function effectively in your class's ecological niche - and the adventure material being adjusted to that new balance.
3 - Poor balancing of the later material.
This is true.
I think there's less chance of broken material disrupting the game because the foundations of the math are better defined, so it's harder to get the cumulative pile-up of unintended consequences that was often the cause of balance issues in PF1.
That's a big deal for me! :)
PF1 was a system that was a slog for me to prepare for and run, but I still loved the customizability. PF2 has fewer options than PF1 (after 10 years), but still feels like there's plenty to customize when designing a character build, which is not the feeling I get when I have picked up or played other class-based systems.
This will be a big deal for my player group.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
*checks thread title*
Yes.
*leaves thread*
:P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Outcome unclear. Ask again later, when informed opinions are more common.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just finished reading through the Core Rulebook.
My first thought was, "You wanted legalese. You GOT your legalese!"
Everything has been codified. Many of the rules are even repeated for the sake of ease. Though, this might not be everyone's cup of tea, I think it was actually done really, really well all things considered.
For a massive, in-depth rules tome, it is surprisingly simple.
As for whether or not it's better? My armchair opinion sans play is this, yes, mechanically it looks to be superior. Rules are intuitive, simple, fast, and well laid out.
That being said, I keep falling asleep while reading the rules, which isn't generally a good sign. Having read one or two classes, I feel very much as though I've already read all the rest. That simplicity comes with a cost, however, and a great many things ended up seeming very much like a great many other things, which makes them less interesting.
But we'll see how actual play works out soon enough. Just about to sit down and make my first character.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've had the book for a few days now and have to say that I think it's quite a bit better than the original "Pathfinder".
My reasoning?
My players also have their books and are constantly flooding whatsapp chat with all their excitement over everything.
They were excited for PF1 too but it wasn't this level of excitement.
Worth the money and I can already tell that running it is going to be a blast.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, Pathfinder 2 is worth the money.
I say that as someone who was EXTREMELY skeptical of the play test.
In fact I only subscribed at the very last moment before they started doing the order authorizations.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
DnD 3.5, PF1 and 13th Age are too complicated for a lot of my friends that I want to play with. DnD 4 and 5 are too boring for me. Dungeon World is pretty good at scratching the dungeon delving part of my brain, but doesn't really work well for most of the weirdness DnD-inspired games offer past 3rd Edition. What I've seen of PF2 makes me think the intention is to be somewhere in the middle of the first two groups while also trying out a couple new and clever mechanics neither of those games cover.
My money is also pretty tight though, so I'm probably going to run a couple games with Archives of Nethys before making a commitment.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s hard to say without extensive experience running it, but my initial impression is that it will likely be a better game for my group than PF1 or 5e are.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're that worried about money, why not wait until tomorrow when you can view the full game rules for $0 online, then make a decision based on your own impressions?
I have a tangentially related question. Does anyone know if I purchase the pdf tomorrow will I get an immediate download link or does it have to be processed or something first?Yes, Pathfinder 2 is worth the money.
I say that as someone who was EXTREMELY skeptical of the play test.
In fact I only subscribed at the very last moment before they started doing the order authorizations.
It should be immediate, providing there's no problem with your payment method.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a tangentially related question. Does anyone know if I purchase the pdf tomorrow will I get an immediate download link or does it have to be processed or something first?Yes, Pathfinder 2 is worth the money.
I say that as someone who was EXTREMELY skeptical of the play test.
In fact I only subscribed at the very last moment before they started doing the order authorizations.
Yes, you'll get a link to download it "immediately" in the digital content section of your My Account link at the top right corner of the page.
It might take a few minutes to go through, depending on how busy the page is (tomorrow it might be VERY busy).
It should be immediate, providing there's no problem with your payment method.I have a tangentially related question. Does anyone know if I purchase the pdf tomorrow will I get an immediate download link or does it have to be processed or something first?Yes, Pathfinder 2 is worth the money.
I say that as someone who was EXTREMELY skeptical of the play test.
In fact I only subscribed at the very last moment before they started doing the order authorizations.
I feel like the limiter here is "tomorrow". Since it's the first day the PDF will be available for download, there might be site issues when everyone tries to download it at once.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like the limiter here is "tomorrow". Since it's the first day the PDF will be available for download, there might be site issues when everyone tries to download it at once.It should be immediate, providing there's no problem with your payment method.I have a tangentially related question. Does anyone know if I purchase the pdf tomorrow will I get an immediate download link or does it have to be processed or something first?Yes, Pathfinder 2 is worth the money.
I say that as someone who was EXTREMELY skeptical of the play test.
In fact I only subscribed at the very last moment before they started doing the order authorizations.
Possible, but the site stayed up with no problems when the Playtest was released. Paizo and their tech have come a long way since P1e came out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it worth the money?
Depends on if you have a group that is interested in playing it.
I don't so my answer would be no.
For anyone who dose have a willing group the answer is probably yes.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just finished reading through the Core Rulebook.
My first thought was, "You wanted legalese. You GOT your legalese!"
Everything has been codified. Many of the rules are even repeated for the sake of ease. Though, this might not be everyone's cup of tea, I think it was actually done really, really well all things considered.
For a massive, in-depth rules tome, it is surprisingly simple.
As for whether or not it's better? My armchair opinion sans play is this, yes, mechanically it looks to be superior. Rules are intuitive, simple, fast, and well laid out.
That being said, I keep falling asleep while reading the rules, which isn't generally a good sign. Having read one or two classes, I feel very much as though I've already read all the rest. That simplicity comes with a cost, however, and a great many things ended up seeming very much like a great many other things, which makes them less interesting.
But we'll see how actual play works out soon enough. Just about to sit down and make my first character.
THANK YOU.
I could not precisely define what I found missing in the CRB. You put words on it.
The system looks pretty good and very well thought-out. And the book is orders of magnitude easier to access than the playtest CRB.
And it is not exactly boring. But it lacks the breath of spirit and adventure that would make it a captivating read to me.
It feels like a User Guide you check rather than a book you read.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just finished reading through the Core Rulebook.
My first thought was, "You wanted legalese. You GOT your legalese!"
Everything has been codified. Many of the rules are even repeated for the sake of ease. Though, this might not be everyone's cup of tea, I think it was actually done really, really well all things considered.
For a massive, in-depth rules tome, it is surprisingly simple.
As for whether or not it's better? My armchair opinion sans play is this, yes, mechanically it looks to be superior. Rules are intuitive, simple, fast, and well laid out.
That being said, I keep falling asleep while reading the rules, which isn't generally a good sign. Having read one or two classes, I feel very much as though I've already read all the rest. That simplicity comes with a cost, however, and a great many things ended up seeming very much like a great many other things, which makes them less interesting.
But we'll see how actual play works out soon enough. Just about to sit down and make my first character.
THANK YOU.
I could not precisely define what I found missing in the CRB. You put words on it.
The system looks pretty good and very well thought-out. And the book is orders of magnitude easier to access than the playtest CRB.
And it is not exactly boring. But it lacks the breath of spirit and adventure that would make it a captivating read to me.
It feels like a User Guide you check rather than a book you read.
Happy to help. :D
It feels like a User Guide you check rather than a book you read.
I'd say it's a fine thing for the rulebook to have, as long as the world/character guides and the adventures themselves retain/improve upon the evocative writing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's absolutely too early to say, even for people who have read the full book; a question like this can't be answered without play experience.
However, PF2 makes a monk with huge muscles a viable and even powerful build right out of the box. So. Should be pretty good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd say it's a fine thing for the rulebook to have, as long as the world/character guides and the adventures themselves retain/improve upon the evocative writing.
It feels like a User Guide you check rather than a book you read.
I agree with this
Surely the user guide statement also applies to the 1E core books if you think about it truly objectively (not saying anyone isn’t doing that)
I don’t think the intention is you read through the book from cover to cover. I think you are supposed to read the bits relevant to what you want to play. I don’t think the majority are expected to read every word of each ancestry and class before they decide what to play
I know some people want to do that but I don’t think that is what paizo intended
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd say it's a fine thing for the rulebook to have, as long as the world/character guides and the adventures themselves retain/improve upon the evocative writing.
It feels like a User Guide you check rather than a book you read.I agree with this
Surely the user guide statement also applies to the 1E core books if you think about it truly objectively (not saying anyone isn’t doing that)
I don’t think the intention is you read through the book from cover to cover. I think you are supposed to read the bits relevant to what you want to play. I don’t think the majority are expected to read every word of each ancestry and class before they decide what to play
I know some people want to do that but I don’t think that is what paizo intended
The CRB is the first glimpse most people will get of PF2. The more it entices you to know more about the game, the system, the setting, the better IMO.
Speaking only for myself, I often chose game systems I followed faithfully based on reading the rules. Because the tone, setting and mood they evocated made me want to create a character at once so that I could dive headfirst into that.
Best example for me was Ars Magica. After reading only a small part of the book, I was overexcited at the prospect of creating a character.
YMMV obviously.
It's absolutely too early to say, even for people who have read the full book; a question like this can't be answered without play experience.
However, PF2 makes a monk with huge muscles a viable and even powerful build right out of the box. So. Should be pretty good.
I went straight from running a PF1 game to the playtest. The things that I really liked about the playtest are still there in 2E. The action economy, the major class redesign, the skills, etc.
It was just smoother, even with playtest rules. There were a few sharp points (resonance), but those seemed to be filed down and polished up.
I'm assuming there will be things I eventually find I don't like so much, but the foundation has been, in my actual play of the playtest (where those parts are substantively the same in final), much better.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
<shrug> Depends. Did you like PF1E as it was and just wished for improvements on the outlier stuff? Then I'd definitely say "no" to your thread premise.
But if you hated strong magic with a burning passion and also wanted the iconics to wear more clothing, then I'd say PF2E can be your huckleberry. It is conceptually another game than PF1E, 3E and 3.5, it just is wearing the skin of those games like a loose hanging fleshsuit.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Comparing like to like (i.e. the CRB and Bestiary 1 of each), I don't think there is even a question.But that is the exact question I am asking: Is PF2 worth my money?
Captain Morgan's thread has devolved to the point that it is no longer useful for this purpose. :(
But one game has 10 years of supporting material and you can't catch up to that in 1000 pages.No, you can't. That is an unfair comparison.
I haven't had a chance to try the game out an the gaming table, yet, but based on everything I've seen thus far, PF2 is unequivocally a better game than PF1. And I was a "PF1 Forever!" diehard.
Organization, presentation, consistency of the rules and how they are presented are far superior to PF1.
Class structure is pretty damn brilliant. I couldn't understand the changes to archetypes given how popular they were in PF1. Now that I have the PF2 CRB, I get it. Build Your Class how you want it is now done on a Class Feat by Class Feat basis instead of swapping out sets of abilities feats like PF1 did. Class customization is baked into each class.
Trap options seem to have been eliminated and obvious "must haves" are rare or non-existent. Variety of builds is greater in that regard, as there are few/no obvious go-to choices.
Similarly, skills are simplified yet make more sense and seem to do more.
Proficiency isn't just a bonus, it also indicates ability so character progression feels more organic than PF1s, "I took a skill and am now as good at it as someone who's had it for years/levels" or PF1s front-loaded multi-class dips.
Degrees of success & failure are great.
Paizo managed to pull off "easier to learn" while still providing more mechanical depth. Obviously, by more, I don't mean volume but rather options. I can also see how PF2s design achieves the oft-cited goal of "opening design space". PF2 supplements won't be going the route of new feat with simple math bonus or super-situational restriction.
Finally, and this will obviously be vetted during actual play, PF2 appears to be much more of a "yes/try it" system and not a "no, you can't" like PF1 could be when you didn't have a specific feat.
Will every PF1 concept or build port over intact? No. Just like every other RPG edition change that I've seen in 30 years. Will you be able to better realize certain fantasy archetypes, concepts, and adaptations than you could in PF1? Absolutely, yes.
If you're still on the fence then at a minimum, I think it's worth a PDF purchase.
<shrug> Depends. Did you like PF1E as it was and just wished for improvements on the outlier stuff? Then I'd definitely say "no" to your thread premise.
I have experienced PF1 problems that arise from "Class Tiers" and "Bonus Runaway." These problems are fundamental enough to the system, that I don't believe that "improvements on the outlier stuff" would have been enough to fix them.
But if you hated strong magic with a burning passion
Not not a "Burning Passion" as you describe, but I am aware of what the problems with PF1 are.
and also wanted the iconics to wear more clothing,
Anyone who has followed my posting history knows that is NOT the case. :)
But, I am aware that my opinion is the minority.
then I'd say PF2E can be your huckleberry. It is conceptually another game than PF1E, 3E and 3.5, it just is wearing the skin of those games like a loose hanging fleshsuit.
Your statement seems a bit harsh. But, I'm looking at the new rules and wondering, did they do more then needed?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
<shrug> Depends. Did you like PF1E as it was and just wished for improvements on the outlier stuff? Then I'd definitely say "no" to your thread premise.I have experienced PF1 problems that arise from "Class Tiers" and "Bonus Runaway." These problems are fundamental enough to the system, that I don't believe that "improvements on the outlier stuff" would have been enough to fix them.
I disagree. The way of class homogenization lies 4E. Which doesn't mean you can't fix some of the harsher problems without gutting the entire magic system.
then I'd say PF2E can be your huckleberry. It is conceptually another game than PF1E, 3E and 3.5, it just is wearing the skin of those games like a loose hanging fleshsuit.Your statement seems a bit harsh. But, I'm looking at the new rules and wondering, did they do more then needed?
I'm pretty sure they did. But I'm one of the people who will definitely stay with 1E, so I'm biased.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. The way of class homogenization lies 4E. Which doesn't mean you can't fix some of the harsher problems without gutting the entire magic system.
I'm not sure homogenization is really relevant to the points he's bringing up. I mean, PF1 is in a lot of ways very homogenous, especially when it comes to shared-list spellcasters and martial design, but that didn't stop it from having a lot of issues.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
wanted the iconics to wear more clothing
Paizo did it exactly right. Making the artwork PG rather than PG-13 reaches a broader audience and extends the lifetime of the game.
This is a book that I can buy for my kids; if my kids have friends that want to play, I can show this book to their parents without fear of them opening the book to That Page.
Even as a 10 year old kid, I knew pictures of harpies with naked breasts was a bad idea. Sure enough, my friend's parents saw it and took away our dice (we only had one set that we all shared). We had to play D&D using slips of paper we pulled from a box.
There are plenty of websites where you can find or request PG-13 / R / X / XXX drawings of characters. It's not an integral part of the game so Paizo can leave it to others.
money stuff
This is how I view it: I calculate the money I've spent, and divide it by the total time I've spent to see how it compares with other things in my life.
Let's say you buy 10 hardcover books at $50 each, and then spend 50 hours/year for the next 10 years playing with a group of 5. That's $0.20/hr/person. Even if you spend more or play less or play with fewer people, and that number is 10x worse ($2/hr), it's still an inexpensive, infinitely replayable hobby compared to movies ($5-7/hr/person), or Disneyland ($10-15/hr/person).
If $15 at one go is hard (we've all been there), take your change at the end of each day and put some in a jar. You'll probably save $15 in a month and not even notice.
Going off the free SRD is fine but remember to go back and support the content creators whenever you do have money.
No, It's not fair to ask people to judge 2e while the new game smell is still on it. People need time for the hype to either die down and for us to see if this edition will be supported like 1e, or supported like SF. Personally I feel like the claims of easier to run are over-exaggerated, since this edition has decreased the sheer number of options, but has increase individual complication. And the "At least it isn't a massive system weighed down by it's supplement" will inevitably come up in ten years when people are demanding a 3e.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. The way of class homogenization lies 4E. Which doesn't mean you can't fix some of the harsher problems without gutting the entire magic system.I'm not sure homogenization is really relevant to the points he's bringing up. I mean, PF1 is in a lot of ways very homogenous, especially when it comes to shared-list spellcasters and martial design, but that didn't stop it from having a lot of issues.
The way he was mentioning tier lists recalls for me the homogenization which happened between 3.5 and 4E, the goal of which was to do away with class imbalances. In a sense this is what happened with 1E and 2E as well in what I've seen so far. I think classes being different is what keeps bringing people back for 20 years playing essentially the same game, since you can get a vastly different experience playing a Barbarian from a Wizard from an Alchemist from an Oracle and so on.
But I get that some people were upset at their Rogues not being able to teleport on their own. My personal opinion just is that it's better to bring weak classes up rather than strong classes down.
wanted the iconics to wear more clothingPaizo did it exactly right. Making the artwork PG rather than PG-13 reaches a broader audience and extends the lifetime of the game.
This is a book that I can buy for my kids; if my kids have friends that want to play, I can show this book to their parents without fear of them opening the book to That Page.
Even as a 10 year old kid, I knew pictures of harpies with naked breasts was a bad idea. Sure enough, my friend's parents saw it and took away our dice (we only had one set that we all shared). We had to play D&D using slips of paper we pulled from a box.
There are plenty of websites where you can find or request PG-13 / R / X / XXX drawings of characters. It's not an integral part of the game so Paizo can leave it to others.
Yeah, hard disagree on that. Paizo bringing out adventures which were written for at least teenagers if not older folks was one of the things I most liked about the company from the start. The slow backslide into PG-land over the last decade was one of the more disappointing developments in their company history for me.
Also, nobody is asking for R-rated stuff in their Paizo published fantasy artwork. But I find the slow puritanization of fantasy which seems to be going on (and the same happening on a civil society level as well) to be really off-putting.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not that a critical mass of people now have their books, I want to ask a general question.
Is Pathfinder 2 a better game then its predicessor Pathfinder 1?
"THAN", not then.
those are different words with VASTLY different meanings ...