If there is one thing about Pathfinder 1e I like, it is how specific many character options are.
I can zoom into an area of the world, find character options for specific places, and play something definite and tailored to one place, in one nation, and have that character feel like they fit in and are a part of the original OG Golarion world.
With Pathfinder 2E, the entire world is genericized and cookie-cutter. The roles and background options are mono-culture and generic, not tied to one part, nation, place, or culture. Like every character is a playing piece in Monopoly. The options and choices are fantastic, but they all feel generic. In Pathfinder 1e, I have options for any character I can imagine.
I get it; most groups play in their own world. Generic options are better than specific ones. I play GURPS, after all; what is the problem? The possibilities here are tied into this world so tightly they invite me to explore deeper. Where was this option created? Who is it for? Can I tell stories with them?
But the original OG Golarion world - this place was something else. Every bit as violent, vile, noble, savage, hopeful, and dark to the depth of Hell you could ever ask for in a fantasy world. This out Game of Thrones the books and beats Forgotten Realms and makes that look like a McDonald's playground. Hell was on the world, and entire peoples - no matter their ancestry or skin color - were enslaved by evil. If you were good, it was your job to push back the tide, bring these fiends to justice, and free those in shackles and bondage.
Great stories were written into the setting. The hero's journey is there.
The OG world is the best example of the 9-axis alignment system brought to life in a game world. Greyhawk has nothing on this. The 2E remaster does away with alignment.
The 2E Lost Omens version of the world feels like it was revised out of fear. Like the writers were ashamed of all the cool stuff they wrote and created, they pulled it back massively. The fatal mistake all writers make is pulling back out of fear. And readers see it instantly.
I am not a hater either; I went hard on subscriptions for the first two years - and have a complete set. I paid my dues. With every book and adventure I got, the world felt less and less for me. Everything was too happy, colorful, peaceful, and modern. After a while, I realized the new books made me dislike the old ones. I didn't care if the rules were better; the tone was wrong.
And I can't blame Paizo for the censorship. Twitter mobs would run them out of business.
But I do mourn what was lost.
There were no internal struggles between good and evil.
Those choices we all have to make.
Adventuring in Lost Omens feels like sightseeing - it is far too happy and modern. Neon lights and pastel landscapes. Borrowing real-world cultures and festivals is placed ahead of worldbuilding. It does not feel like the Golarion I fell in love with in 2009; it feels like a version the creators needed to clean up. paint over, and tone down.
The drow elves are gone. Cheliax has been hidden from view. The violent, savage cultures are gone. There are no slavers to destroy. There are far too many backgrounds. Extraordinary things aren't unique; they are every day. Of course, it is expected to see talking houseplants and puppets walking around every city. Steampunk is everywhere and gives us modern conveniences. Everything is too cosmopolitan, contemporary, and mixed together like some overly sweet fruit drink; you can't tell what it is, but it is citrus-something.
I was reading the old Golarion 3.5 book for Gods & Magic. This book is just fantastic. There are entries for all the original OG gods; some are downright brutal and savage, and others walk a thin line between good and evil - or just not caring.
The entry for Calistria is shocking and reads like something out of Game of Thrones or a mature-themed fantasy novel. They removed the concept of her clerics working as prostitutes, and the entire theme and nature of the goddess changed to a more PG caricature mean girl.
Abadar went from a lawful neutral god that could have temples in Cheliax, to a boring, for the good of all, accountant. The description of the Lost Omens Gods and Magic reads like he is a goody-two-shoe. Still, in the original Chronicles book, he is a god of merchants and has no problem enforcing an order or allowing his followers to buy and sell people. He is a hardcore Lawful Neutral - and not good nor evil. You could ask one of his clerics why they allow the buying and selling of people under their noses, and they would say it is just business and supported by their god.
That is some serious, hardcore stuff.
It reflects on the worst parts of humanity and is profoundly literate and poignant in our history. How could you ignore this? How could you say nothing? How could you support this system?
He gets his cities and civilization; he does not care.
Does it make him evil? Today? Yes. On the nine-axis alignment system? He is a neutral. This is what neutrals do. They don't judge good or evil. Think of that next time you make a neutral character.
People today can't stand that or even understand it. I don't condone it, but given the world that created our civilization, I know where it comes from and the damage it caused - even today, we live with it.
Civilization? Right. At what price? Your soul?
By omitting sensitive subjects, the hard choices and moral dilemmas disappeared. Any chance we had to talk about them was gone. That game and world changed to a tabletop battle game. Builds and tactics mattered, but the story and hard choices didn't. We loved that tight tactical gameplay in 4E; it does not appeal to me today. I crave conflict and story.
Lamashtu went from a more tribal, primitive goddess with followers in wild lands to a demon that preys on outcasts. Her entire tribal worship aspect was erased, and in the original book, the tribes seemed to care about their children significantly (sternly dealt with, but still protected). The tone change here from a primitive goddess to a monster breeder is pretty noticeable. She feels like the setting's patron bad guy now since many of the boss monsters lean hard on disfigurement, which raises my progressive eyebrow.
It is easy to equate disfigurement with evil, but given all their efforts to move the setting hard into socially acceptable themes - it feels like a shortcut in art and message that would send the wrong message. Me? I understand moral tales like Beauty and the Beast or Quasimodo and know that even disfigured shells of flesh can have good hearts within.
You get this when social media culture worships appearance, and you accept it as the norm.
In the old game, it sounded like Lamashtu could be worshipped by those on the edges of society. Yes, it is a chaotic, evil religion, but there is enough here to work with to say a tribe of humans could worship her and still be considered civilized and a faction that could be dealt with. The new Lamashtu sounds like a stereotyped monster breeder and chaos goddess out of Warhammer FRP. They pushed a little too hard into stereotypes in simplifying things, and the subtlety and nuance are gone in 2E.
I know the 2E world is "what I make of it" - but it does not feel the same anymore. What made the setting feel real is gone.
And to find these topics, I need to return to the unfiltered, uncensored 1E books.
No comments:
Post a Comment