TheRPGSite

Man I am sick of these threads about how much 5e sucks donkey balls, so time to spread around that love.

It turns out that Pathfinder 2 was not as perfect as those Paizo shills would have you believe so now we have errata, another 5 pages to pad out that already impressive tome of bullet stopping.

Find it here now for your amusement and edification (https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzq?Core-Rulebook-Errata-Round-1).

Ha!!!

5 pages is not that bad. Compared to 100.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;11126515 pages is not that bad. Compared to 100.

How many is that kickstarter Traveller up to? :D

Is the errata just clarifications? Or actual rules goofs?

5e D&D for example had quite a bit of goofs. But once those were fixed in later print runs all thats left is errata of the rules clarification sort.

Pathfinder 2 isn't dead yet ? How droll.

1. They corrected the small, easy stuff to correct;
2. They punted on the difficult stuff to correct with a disclaimer saying they're taking longer to work on a better fix for those things - which is rough because it's those things people actually needed the fix for, not the easy stuff. I am not saying that's necessarily a bad decision though, just one which is prone to irritate some impatient players.
3. This is the first time they have done this without a new print run to go along with it. Which could mean nothing, or it could mean a lot, concerning their existing unsold first run inventory.
4. People have already found four errors in this short errata (meaningful ones, not just grammar or spelling). Which I find mildly amusing.
5. The backpack/bulk rules are not functioning as intended, no matter which interpretation people are using. It either results in an incredibly complicated character sheet where you track items twice depending on where they are stored at that moment, or it results in a shorthand of just -2 bulk and an abuse loophole of wearing plate mail and just a backpack to make it weigh less. And then whichever method you use, you then run into the issue of having to re-calculate bulk every time a weapon is removed from a sheath or an item from a container (plus apparently a starting character package of equipment ends up weighing less than the items obtained separately). It's just not a system worth this level of complexity. I suspect people will just handwaive it pretty quickly.

Quote from: Mistwell;11126845. The backpack/bulk rules are not functioning as intended, no matter which interpretation people are using. It either results in an incredibly complicated character sheet where you track items twice depending on where they are stored at that moment, or it results in a shorthand of just -2 bulk and an abuse loophole of wearing plate mail and just a backpack to make it weigh less. And then whichever method you use, you then run into the issue of having to re-calculate bulk every time a weapon is removed from a sheath or an item from a container (plus apparently a starting character package of equipment ends up weighing less than the items obtained separately). It's just not a system worth this level of complexity. I suspect people will just handwaive it pretty quickly.

I find the bulk system in Starfinder works just great. It's far easier to do encumbrance with bigger numbers, a 1 handed "thing" sword, shield, etc, being 1 bulk is a super-easy to remember. It's altogether a great compromise between not using encumbrance and tracking every coin.
How did PF2 fuck this up?

What reason is there to even buy a physical fucking game book if there are going to be PAGES worth of errata after the fact? That's just fucking dumb. Does Paizo even offer PDF versions of their products? May as well just get that and re-download every time they add more shit; at this rate your physical products will literally be rendered obsolete in its own fucking edition lifespan. "Oh hey guys, yea I brought my books - err, shit, forgot my 50-page errata binder. Guess we'll just play something else tonight, then..."

But yeah, at least it's not Traveller-bad.

Strange Paizo normally does not do errata until a new print run. They must feel like the rules in their current form are hurting sales enough that they will not move all of the current print run.

The errata to backpacks says:

"The first 2 Bulk of items in your backpack don't count against your Bulk limits."

So I am not sure how anyone can interpret that as making Plate Mail weigh less or in fact getting confused about which item is where.

Maybe, just maybe, if they had spent more time writing the damn rules and revising them instead of writing a frigging sermon about how people should play this wouldn't be necessary.

Also am I crazy or some of the "errata" is due to politically incorrect language?

Quote Changes to Greater Juggernaut, Greater resolve, improved evasion, and Third Path to Perfection

All four of these abilities grant a two-tier benefit on a failed saving throw of the specified type, but (as always) no ability will ever change your degree of success by more than one step. To clarify, we're making the following clarification to all four abilities. Change the beginning of the last sentence from  "When  you  fail"  the  listed  saving  throw  to  "When  you roll a failure on" the listed saving throw.  

Sure seems like PC newspeak to me.

I think that the problem is that many RPGs don't seem to go through much playtesting, and they use a print run as a playtest substitute. Strange in the case of Pathfinder, as there was a playtest version you could buy in advance of the real thing, but when a game has strange rules errors it often points out something that should have been caught in playtest..

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1112739Also am I crazy or some of the "errata" is due to politically incorrect language?

Sure seems like PC newspeak to me.

No, in this case it is because you are crazy.  In more simple terms you can roll a failure or a critical failure (or a success or critical success) and they dont want you to be able to turn a critical failure into a success (or I guess a failure into a critical success which is also a two step change)

Quote from: finarvyn;1112741I think that the problem is that many RPGs don't seem to go through much playtesting, and they use a print run as a playtest substitute. Strange in the case of Pathfinder, as there was a playtest version you could buy in advance of the real thing, but when a game has strange rules errors it often points out something that should have been caught in playtest..

That is a funny story about when you play test the game, decide to change the rules based on that play testing and yet the wrong rules still make it through to the final product.  Or in this case both the playtest rules and the new final rules.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1112693What reason is there to even buy a physical fucking game book if there are going to be PAGES worth of errata after the fact? That's just fucking dumb.

If I recall right, Paizo, like WOTC, folds any errata/fixes into later print runs?

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1112739Maybe, just maybe, if they had spent more time writing the damn rules and revising them instead of writing a frigging sermon about how people should play this wouldn't be necessary.

Also am I crazy or some of the "errata" is due to politically incorrect language?

Sure seems like PC newspeak to me.

No, just sounds like they are trying to head off at the pass any potential rules laywering or gaming of the system. You see it now and then in board game design too when a designer starts to obsess over stuff like this to the point you get paragraphs devoted to trying to cover every possible way someone could fuck with just one element, let alone several. Ive seen far far worse.

Quote from: finarvyn;1112741I think that the problem is that many RPGs don't seem to go through much playtesting, and they use a print run as a playtest substitute. Strange in the case of Pathfinder, as there was a playtest version you could buy in advance of the real thing, but when a game has strange rules errors it often points out something that should have been caught in playtest..

Its not that. Its the problem that between playtesting and print any number of goofs may happen as you approach print time. And the chances of goofs increase the more you rush after playtest. Or the more you tweak based on feedback but dont playtest THAT.

So you end up with possibly rules artifacts left in the manuscript, or during print something just gets lost. Or whomever was doing layout goofed, and so on. These can end up creeping in and no way to spot them till after. Now magnify that potential for problems for every single tweak or addition/change.

Quote from: Shasarak;1112747That is a funny story about when you play test the game, decide to change the rules based on that play testing and yet the wrong rules still make it through to the final product.  Or in this case both the playtest rules and the new final rules.

Exactly. Or hopefully exactly. But yeah they may have also been diverting too much attention into being woke and making a "safe place" than to proofreading or spot checking.

But odds are it is the age old problem of rules artifacts sneaking into the final, or bits of the final getting lost during layout.

Quote from: Omega;1112756Exactly. Or hopefully exactly. But yeah they may have also been diverting too much attention into being woke and making a "safe place" than to proofreading or spot checking.

I think some people are a bit too sensitive to "Wokeness" until they literally start seeing it everywhere even in game mechanics.

QuoteBut odds are it is the age old problem of rules artifacts sneaking into the final, or bits of the final getting lost during layout.

Yeah I can not imagine publishing a 500+ page book with no mistakes.  Heck it is hard enough to make a forum post with no mistakes.

Quote from: Shasarak;1112726The errata to backpacks says:

"The first 2 Bulk of items in your backpack don't count against your Bulk limits."

So I am not sure how anyone can interpret that as making Plate Mail weigh less or in fact getting confused about which item is where.

Then you're not following. I was saying, based on the reactions others are having to the complexity of tracking items in the container and out of the container. Your bulk literally changes every time you draw a weapon from a sheath, which you would need to know if you're using that system, which means everything needs to be tracked based on where it is or could be. That people are instead HAND WAIVING that you just reduce weight by 2 and call it a day. Which can lead to the abuse of items outside the container weighing less. From a tracking standpoint, it seems to be a system that isn't very functional on a practical basis.

Quote from: Shasarak;1112747That is a funny story about when you play test the game, decide to change the rules based on that play testing and yet the wrong rules still make it through to the final product.  Or in this case both the playtest rules and the new final rules.

That sounds a lot like the FFG playtesting experiences I had. Several things were pointed out as being wrong, the playtest coordinator and the author agreed that they were wrong, but the errors still made it through to the final products. I found it rather annoying.

Quote from: Shasarak;1112747No, in this case it is because you are crazy.  In more simple terms you can roll a failure or a critical failure (or a success or critical success) and they dont want you to be able to turn a critical failure into a success (or I guess a failure into a critical success which is also a two step change)



That is a funny story about when you play test the game, decide to change the rules based on that play testing and yet the wrong rules still make it through to the final product.  Or in this case both the playtest rules and the new final rules.

Ugh. I've always viewed critical successes and failues as being just over wrought meme garbage. Totally disruptive, and unrealistic. How does Pathfinder 2e handle this? Critical fumble tables?

Quote from: ZetaRidley;1112766Ugh. I've always viewed critical successes and failues as being just over wrought meme garbage. Totally disruptive, and unrealistic. How does Pathfinder 2e handle this? Critical fumble tables?

Critical Success is either ten more then your DC or a nat 20 (if that would normally be a success).  A Critical Failure is either ten less then your DC or a nat 1 (if that would normally be a failure).

In the base game weapon Critical Hits do double damage and Spells may have additional effects on a Critical Success or less effects on a Critical Failure.

I cant see any reason why you could not use your own Critical Tables or Pathfinder Critical Hit Decks (https://paizo.com/products/btq01zpt?Pathfinder-Critical-Hit-Deck).

Quote from: Shasarak;1112759I think some people are a bit too sensitive to "Wokeness" until they literally start seeing it everywhere even in game mechanics.

In Paizo's case thats because they are very woke and have stated so. Hence whatever they do gets scrutinized through that lens because its a lens of their own crafting.

Quote from: Shasarak;1112726The errata to backpacks says:

"The first 2 Bulk of items in your backpack don't count against your Bulk limits."

So I am not sure how anyone can interpret that as making Plate Mail weigh less or in fact getting confused about which item is where.

Ok, I re-read the bulk & backpack rules for Starfinder. If you have a "common" backpack, it raises your strength by 1 for purposes of encumbrance. If you have an industrial backpack, it raises your strength by 2 for purposes of encumbrance. Also, it can hold up to 2 bulk worth of items. Which is important if you're going to carry more than what you can grab with your two (or four in the case of some aliens) mitts.

So, the backpack itself has two seperate, but related, effects. By specifiying what's in the pack is what's effected by the reduction of encumbrance is where it seems they went wrong.

I'm actually perplexed as to why people are giving time and effort to PF2, but then people will generally play what they enjoy. However, it almost seems to me that many of the people supporting it are just desperate to see it succeed.

I played pathfinder 2 for about 6 weeks, because I have a history with the 1st edition. The book is just a mess when it comes to editing, layout, writing, and game design. If a 'nobody' wrote the pathfinder 2 book and it was called something else, I honestly think it would have been laughed at or forgotten by now.

I'm actually surprised the errata is only 5 pages. They need a 2nd printing already imo.

Quote from: Omega;1112768In Paizo's case thats because they are very woke and have stated so. Hence whatever they do gets scrutinized through that lens because its a lens of their own crafting.

There are some companies which might be fairly described as "very woke", like Ben and Jerry's. But Paizo is not one of them. They're a pretty ordinary content-related company.  This isn't "very woke".

Quote from: Mistwell;1112836There are some companies which might be fairly described as "very woke", like Ben and Jerry's. But Paizo is not one of them. They're a pretty ordinary content-related company.  This isn't "very woke".

You're kidding, right?

Besides the whole section dedicated to promoting the X Card and the whole "choose your pronouns" bit in 2nd edition, we have the declaration that all good societies allow homosexual marriage, a traditionally Lawful Good god being changed to Lawful Neutral because of the doctrine that mothers should be the stay-at-home parent (and the product manager stating that he should have been declared evil for that reason), an atheist nation whose key to stability and prosperity is oppressing all religions, about a third of the population being homosexual or transsexual, stating that it is impossible to be both evil and working against slavery, and literally declaring the demon of tyranny to also be the demon of misogyny.

I would ask what more needs to happen to be considered "woke" but I can't figure how what more "wokeness" they can cram into their setting.

Quote from: Fergurg;1112839You're kidding, right?

Besides the whole section dedicated to promoting the X Card and the whole "choose your pronouns" bit in 2nd edition, we have the declaration that all good societies allow homosexual marriage, a traditionally Lawful Good god being changed to Lawful Neutral because of the doctrine that mothers should be the stay-at-home parent (and the product manager stating that he should have been declared evil for that reason), an atheist nation whose key to stability and prosperity is oppressing all religions, about a third of the population being homosexual or transsexual, stating that it is impossible to be both evil and working against slavery, and literally declaring the demon of tyranny to also be the demon of misogyny.

I would ask what more needs to happen to be considered "woke" but I can't figure how what more "wokeness" they can cram into their setting.

I am not kidding. You're pretty sheltered if you think this is "very woke". This is very mild.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1112739Maybe, just maybe, if they had spent more time writing the damn rules and revising them instead of writing a frigging sermon about how people should play this wouldn't be necessary.

Agreed and seconded then again it's not the first time where Paizo screwed up with RAw and requiring major errata to make a product fully useable.

Advanced Class Guide hardcover was a much worse offender imo. They were in such a rush to get it out for a Gencon release that the cover had Adventure Path write on it. At least 9-10+ errata. Which would have been more if they did not use small font for the errata. With some classes being unusable or made worst post errata. Instead of apologizing doubled down on trying to use Gencon as an excuse for such a poorly edited product. As apparently unless they released that book at Gencon rather than doing the smart thing of holding back until it was properly edited they would be in the poor house.

Granted the errata is not as bad as Shadowrun 6E, yet I'm starting to get tired and quitr franky lose patience and goodwill towards the same companies who repeat the same mistakes over and over. Thank god for PDfs as unlike the old days of gaming one is no longer stuck with a poorly edited product.

As to the topic at hand not sure if it is because I'm tired of the new edition train, becoming more responsible, losing interest in buying new rpgs or simply going towards a personal gamers mode of non-interest. I don't hate Paizo or 2E Pathfinder I just have a lack of interest, same thing with 5E another lack of interest. I have 1E, 2E and Pathfinder 1E do I need yet another variation of D&D with the serial numbers filed off. It's not to say I no longer buy new rpgs I do and would. They also need to be much better than the previous version. I am probably going to buy the new Savage Rifts books as find the system much better than Palladium Books set of rules. I'm also tired of waiting for Kevin not doing it and nor the countless excuses of the dwindling fanbase who want to see no changes yet expect a miraculous recovery any new day...any day.now.

Quote from: Fergurg;1112839You're kidding, right?

Besides the whole section dedicated to promoting the X Card and the whole "choose your pronouns" bit in 2nd edition

For the first part, where in the book is that? I see a few tame sentences about inclusivity (the sermon from the playtest book didn't make it into the release). I see no mention of an X card, touching a flower, etc.

I did find the second part: "Characters of all genders are equally likely to become adventurers. Record your character's gender, if applicable, and their pronouns on the third page of the character sheet.". The horror.

Both of those together account for maybe a quarter of a page in the book, so less than 1/2400 of the material. While it is higher than zero, to me it is pretty insignificant.

For the rest, I've heard about "all the gays" before, and that all of the NPCs were presumed to be gay unless otherwise noted. You are saying its only a third now. For that and the other things you mentioned, are those actually in a published book? Which one(s)? I've asked before and haven't gotten an answer yet. Is just someone's blog or on a video or something? I find their adventure and setting material to be pretty mediocre and don't buy a whole lot of it, I really don't know.

Regarding critical hits/failures, I can't think of an RPG that doesn't have some type of critical hit. They may call it an "extreme" success or a Red FEAT roll or something else, but its there. Critical Failure in PF2 is often a kind of reverse critical hit for spells (take double damage from the Fireball if you get a Critical Failure). Characters aren't hitting themselves with their own weapon or zapping themselves or the like.

Regarding errata itself, bigger players than Paizo, like Wizards and Games Workshop also put out a lot of errata for their products. Assuming that being perfect the first time just isn't feasible, what solution would you prefer as an alternative to published errata?

Personally, I think it's great that we live in a time where it's so easy to disseminate FAQs and rules errata for books. In ye olden days, you'd have to wait for it to get mentioned in Dragon magazine, if you're lucky, and the next edition if you weren't.
Though that did mean we had to learn to deal with it ourselves, and not rely on some golden scroll to descend from heaven giving us the OK to change a monster's AC or whatnot.

Quote from: Fergurg;1112839You're kidding, right?

Besides the whole section dedicated to promoting the X Card and the whole "choose your pronouns" bit in 2nd edition, we have the declaration that all good societies allow homosexual marriage, a traditionally Lawful Good god being changed to Lawful Neutral because of the doctrine that mothers should be the stay-at-home parent (and the product manager stating that he should have been declared evil for that reason), an atheist nation whose key to stability and prosperity is oppressing all religions, about a third of the population being homosexual or transsexual, stating that it is impossible to be both evil and working against slavery, and literally declaring the demon of tyranny to also be the demon of misogyny.

I would ask what more needs to happen to be considered "woke" but I can't figure how what more "wokeness" they can cram into their setting.

Let's not forget changing "race" because of a fear that it might promote people believing that real-life races are as different as the ones in game.

And the retconning of Iconics.

Paizo is definitaly woke.  Arguments that they aren't "peak" woke are relatively useless, primarily because there is no limit to stupidity...

Quote from: Mistwell;1112848I am not kidding. You're pretty sheltered if you think this is "very woke". This is very mild.

So what would it take? Demanding all game sessions start with burning an American flag and trampling on a crucifix? Or are they saving that for the opening of PaizoCon 2021? ;)

Quote from: Eirikrautha;1112882Let's not forget changing "race" because of a fear that it might promote people believing that real-life races are as different as the ones in game.

If you dont change Race to Ancestry then you can not have the A B C's of character creation.  You dont want to end up with the 3 Rs of Reading, Writing and Arithmetic now, do you?

QuoteAnd the retconning of Iconics.

We did need a Goblin iconic.

Quote from: Shasarak;1112887We did need a Goblin iconic.

Imo not really. Paizo including Goblins as a playable race is just them trying to tap into the WOW demographic. Given how up until 2E no one in their own game world of Golarion liked the damn pests, Paizo retconning it was just plain dumb. I would have included Kobolds as a playable and iconic race instead.

Quote from: sureshot;1112888Imo not really. Paizo including Goblins as a playable race is just them trying to tap into the WOW demographic. Given how up until 2E no one in their own game world of Golarion liked the damn pests, Paizo retconning it was just plain dumb. I would have included Kobolds as a playable and iconic race instead.

Goblins are the iconic Paizo monster race so it makes sense to include them.  Kobolds have more of a Kobold Press sort of vibe going on, too me that is.

I dont see it as a Retcon because you still have the normal crazy ass Goblins and now you also have some that are PCs.  It would be pretty racist just to right off the whole...ancestry ;)

If Pathfinder 2 is anything like Starfinder, hard pass. Way too complicated for an RPG.

And I don’t mean too dense or too many rules, I mean hundreds of special cases that must be applied lest you piss off some rules lawyer. Give me C&S any day.

Quote from: Fergurg;1112839You're kidding, right?

Besides the whole section dedicated to promoting the X Card and the whole "choose your pronouns" bit in 2nd edition, we have the declaration that all good societies allow homosexual marriage, a traditionally Lawful Good god being changed to Lawful Neutral because of the doctrine that mothers should be the stay-at-home parent (and the product manager stating that he should have been declared evil for that reason), an atheist nation whose key to stability and prosperity is oppressing all religions, about a third of the population being homosexual or transsexual, stating that it is impossible to be both evil and working against slavery, and literally declaring the demon of tyranny to also be the demon of misogyny.

I would ask what more needs to happen to be considered "woke" but I can't figure how what more "wokeness" they can cram into their setting.

*Blinks* Egads, that's terrible!

Quote from: Brad;1112893If Pathfinder 2 is anything like Starfinder, hard pass. Way too complicated for an RPG.

And I don't mean too dense or too many rules, I mean hundreds of special cases that must be applied lest you piss off some rules lawyer. Give me C&S any day.

Starfinder is a better system than PF2e...

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1112883So what would it take? Demanding all game sessions start with burning an American flag and trampling on a crucifix? Or are they saving that for the opening of PaizoCon 2021? ;)

Dude it's not Blue Rose. It's suffering the "Looking for SJW content" syndrome. If you LOOK for anything expecting to find it, you will find it. Taking the entire sum of the rules as a whole, the instances of some issue which can be made of a rule are incredibly small. It's pretty minor stuff overall. It's not far out of line with content in other fields. I just think people are hunting for any hint of it right now, and of course finding it and spinning it as best they can to make a case.

The point being missed or ignored is that their was no need for them to include the two pages on them suddenly being woke. All it would have taken was perhaps different phrasing along the lines of " Don't be a jerk, treat others with respect. If one is uncomfortable with the style of campaign talk it over with the table or look for a new table. Dms read the table and make sure to find out what is or is not acceptable to allow into a campaign with players ." Them advising potential DMs and players to play at being a psychologist is not only foolish but also dangerous. Made worse that they don't truly care about being Woke or Social Justice. Just jumping on the bandwagon to get a few dollars more from fans who truly care about being both.

You guys jumping on the "wokeness" are missing Golden opportunities to bitch about how boring and bland the system is.

I see potential in the new system. Unlike some I don't use my dislike of any rpg that is not a favored rpg as an excuse to take a dump on PF2 .

Is it innovative imo no. Neither is it the worst thing ever. Rifts is full of boring and bland OCCs beyond my dislike of the rules I would still play in a campaign with a good GM.

We get it Rhedyn anything you don't like as an rpg is the shits as far as you concerned. Many of us think differently

Quote from: Mistwell;1112991It's not far out of line with content in other fields.

  The depressing thing is, you're probably right. And as I got tired of Paizo's approach to the property and the game back in their Dragon days and have never had any real interest in PF, and they don't want me as part of their audience, I should probably recuse myself from the discussion. :)

Quote from: Mistwell;1112991It's not far out of line with content in other fields.

It's not far out of line with other tabletop entertainment properties aimed at nerdy, white, educated 20-35 year olds.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1113021You guys jumping on the "wokeness" are missing Golden opportunities to bitch about how boring and bland the system is.

Quote from: sureshot;1113023I see potential in the new system. Unlike some I don't use my dislike of any rpg that is not a favored rpg as an excuse to take a dump on PF2 .

Is it innovative imo no. Neither is it the worst thing ever. Rigts is full of boring and bland OCCs beyond my dislike of the rules I would still play in a campaign with a good GM.

We get it Rhedyn anything you don't like as an rpg is the shits as far as you concerned. Many of us think differently

PF2 genuinely improves on many problems with the d20 system, and in some cases is better than 5e even. Unfortunately, many of these problems were already fixed in other spin-offs (e.g. 4e, 5e, SAGA, FantasyCraft, True20, Dreamscarred Psionics, Spheres of Power, etc) long ago and PF2 is playing catch up. I haven't done a full analysis, but I'm sure PF2 fails to account for various other helpful innovations.

I don't see myself playing or running it. I'd probably go for d100 Classic Fantasy or 13th Age instead. 13th Age is great if you don't mind innovations like icons or escalation dice. Classic Fantasy is great if you like having compatibility with the vast d100 library.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1112693What reason is there to even buy a physical fucking game book if there are going to be PAGES worth of errata after the fact? That's just fucking dumb. Does Paizo even offer PDF versions of their products? May as well just get that and re-download every time they add more shit; at this rate your physical products will literally be rendered obsolete in its own fucking edition lifespan. "Oh hey guys, yea I brought my books - err, shit, forgot my 50-page errata binder. Guess we'll just play something else tonight, then..."

But yeah, at least it's not Traveller-bad.

After the Shadowrun 5E core rulebook, I learned that I am better off buying RPG books in PDF format just so I don't have to deal with incorporating all of that errata into a printed book.

Quote from: sureshot;1113008The point being missed or ignored is that their was no need for them to include the two pages on them suddenly being woke. All it would have taken was perhaps different phrasing along the lines of " Don't be a jerk, treat others with respect. If one is uncomfortable with the style of campaign talk it over with the table or look for a new table. Dms read the table and make sure to find out what is or is not acceptable to allow into a campaign with players ."

This is Paizo - they never say in one paragraph what they could instead say in 14 pages with pretty pictures.

Quote from: sureshot;1113023We get it Rhedyn anything you don't like as an rpg is the shits as far as you concerned. Many of us think differently

Now that's unfair. I'm of the opinion that many OSR games are fine even if I won't be playing them. The same honor goes to Rotten Capes, Overlight, Silent Legions, Spears of the Dawn, Other Dust, Eclipse Phase 2e, The Dark Eye, etc.

D&D 4e is a game that I will play but not run.

I'm not to the point I'll run games that I do not favor.

I don't like PbtA, FitD, Scum and Villiany, Blades in the Dark, Band of Blades, or Dungeon World, but none of them are bad games.

I do think D&D 5e and PF2e are bad and that the only reason you will play PF2e is because you are only comparing it to D&D 5e or maybe PF1e. No one actually plays D&D 5e, they play whatever version of D&D the DM thinks D&D is (by design). Those that try to play actual D&D 5e with Dev tweets and intense rules discussions are bound to get a miserable game.

I think that Rhedyn does have a point.  If you like playing DnD 4e then you probably are going to think that Pathfinder 2e is a bad game.