Some warnings 1 confirmed warning, and users report 1 more thing. Checked: 400 reviews and the Android app’s code.
From our automated analysis, 30 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 1.7.1 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 1.7.1, updated 2026-10-14.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Knights of Pen and Paper 3 RPG is a game of Great Adventures, fearsome Monsters and top-tier Stories.
Combining the Classic Turn-Based Battles with Story Driven Campaign, Knights of Pen and Paper brings you a full and rich RPG experience.
So let the dice roll, customize your party and let the bosses know who you are! Battle your way to the mysterious realm of Upsi-Daisies and save the Fantasy world of Paperos.
* Beautiful Pixel Graphics. Yes, the game has graphics and it looks better than ever.
* Create your own party and customize the characters whenever you want!
* Full Story Driven Campaign for dozens of hours of Role Playing!
* Plenty of hand crafted Side Quests.
* Build and Upgrade your home Village.
* Dark Dungeons and generated Side Quests for meaningful endless content.
* Daily Challenges, Item Upgrading, Hidden Secret Codes and more!…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Bundles 16 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, BidMachine, Chartboost and 12 more
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:ac7a0c532baa6cef8f84e6744e120691812a8763d542e886441988b0093f2735Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Sells a subscription in-app but ships no cancel or manage-subscription text of its own, leaving the store's settings as the only exit
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
Package artefact
sha256:ac7a0c532baa6cef8f84e6744e120691812a8763d542e886441988b0093f2735Pay to progress: raised by 20 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 20 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.
400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
I quit playing because combat is tedious, the pay to win kept me away. Animations take forever and no way to speed it up. And combat happens a lot. Literally would avoid easy encounters, because they take so long for no reason. Balance is…
pay to win like crazy. just sitting in town there's an irremovable ad. so immersion breaking time to uninstall. I loved the original game. the second one also fell to microtransactions. would love to see this game go back to it's roots.
PAY-TO-WIN: This version falls short from the earlier two. The fact you need internet connection sucks, everything is now behind a pay wall even classes as basic as barbarian costs $32.99. I rather pay for a perpetual licence and gain…
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 1.7.1, scanned 29 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.7.1 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 1.7.1, updated 2026-10-14.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
• Battle and quest result screen animations can now be skipped • Daily rewards: the streak counter now starts at the right day, and you get the streak bonus the claim screen shows • Chests can no longer be moved to Storage. Any chests already there are back in your inventory • Fixes to Mage spell effects, buff tooltips, the loot panel • Other bug fixes and improvements
No release notes were provided for this version.
knights-of-pen-and-paper-3Assessed 2026-10-30 from 400 user reviews and the app's package.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
This assessment is produced automatically. Four independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every recurring plan the store lists is named as weekly, the term read from the purchase names, with a list cut off at the store’s 10-item maximum not assessed; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.