Quote:
Originally Posted by Najo  I agree that the OGL was an impressive achievement and a great gift. But the issue it has is:
a) The game is stuck in its evolution
b) No really money behind it to make it greater than it is. Profits = company support, professional presentation and stronger development of the game engine. |
The evolution and the money is right here:
www.paizo.com Quote:
|
3.x has some great stuff about it. The OGL has some great stuff about it. But, the facts are 3.x has some issues with it too. The math scales wrong, multiclassing is inbalanced, there are dead areas in the game, DMing the game is requires alot of adherence to rules and all of the math links together, making on the fly adjustments difficult. 3.x is too rules heavy.
|
I agree that 3.x isn't perfect. No game system is. The biggest problem that I see with it is that the math breaks down at the higher levels. How do you fix it? Even I don't have that answer to that (I have a few ideas, but I don't think very many people would like them). At any rate, this is the biggest area that Paizo has yet to work on, and they have made it a priority for the final version of the Pathfinder rules. I'm really looking forward to what they come up with. Even if they can't fix high level play and maintain backwards compatibility, I'm fairly certain that they will come up with a fix of some sort.
Anyway, getting this thread back on track, it will be good for the industry if the next iteration of the
GSL is less restrictive. Despite my current cynicism and general grumpiness with
4E, I want to see it succeed. Failure would mean hard(er) times for the industry and I don't want to see that. Nobody does.
And yet another word from our sponsors
