Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
But if you are looking at better "balancing", and an easier game where you can understand what happens without looking on the net, Pillars is WAY more accessible
I played through both Pillars 1 and 2 recently and can fully recommend starting with that series over Pathfinder. Both are great in their own ways but Pillars is much more straightforward to learn.
I think Pillars has an overall much better story and setting, especially if you continue your save file into the sequel. The first pillars game is relatively rough mechanically and can be an occasionally frustrating but rewarding experience in its own right, but quality of life and overall gameplay improve greatly in Pillars 2.
Kingmaker is relatively complicated and frequently frustrating without any of the charm of the setting or excellent storytelling of Pillars. However, character and team building are much more in-depth and rewarding in the Pathfinder system once you become used to it. Similarly to Pillars, I think QOL improves greatly in the sequel, Wrath of the Righteous. Unlike Pillars, there's less of a requirement to play Kingmaker before WOTR so I would honestly probably skip Kingmaker and just start with WOTR.
(Something to know: if you play poe, there are backer NPCs with a yellowish name plate. Avoid them to not break immersion).
Main story is not bad and the world setting is interesting with their gods and such.
White march, I only played a bunch. (Difficulty seemed higher)
Kingmaker has the option to switch between RTwP and TB, based on Pathfinder 1.0 system which is similar to D&D3.5, better system in my opinion.
The wildcards DLC has Tieflings and Kinetist, varnhold is a side story also quite good.
Main story is based on an adventure path. There is a side gameplay, kingdom management where you can set a different difficulty. Some people dislike that game management so you can set it to auto (you loose equipment only.)
I was very bored while playing Pillars of Eternity, I had a lot of fun while playing Kingsmaker, which has a lot of colorful characters, is more funny and such. Also, I liked the fact that you're quickly leading a territory with all the political decisions you have to make.
POE: Pros Easier to understand and get into. Less bugs in vanilla. Shorter game(you might wonder why this is a pro, Pathfinder is insanely long), No timed events AFAIK, No campaign mode, Classes & abilities that are unique to this franchise
POE Cons: Story could be too dark for someone, No voice acting, Only RTS available
Pathfinder (Including WOTR): Pros: Ruleset derived from 3.5 D&D, Voice acted, Unique Classes and abilities for the franchise, Player Freedom, RTS & turn based available, WOTR has mythic paths - a nice gameplay feature.
Cons: Sometimes unnecessarily obtuse & overcomplicated, excessively long, campaign mode
Indeed how could I forget. OP sorry fot this mistake.