[Kerrick]

Races: why any changes at all? While I am sure it's easy to bring up complaints about this race being too strong here and that race being too weak here, were the 3.xE races truly broken? No, they weren't.

I think a lot of the changes they made were to make the races more compatible with their world of Golarion. As for "broken", well... there are many complaints that half-orcs are overpowered and half-elves are nearly (or completely) useless. They've certainly got a serious case of identity disorder (the fluff says they're social outcasts, but they get a Diplomacy bonus? WTF?). *shrug*

And I believe the benefit of staying 100% compatible with 3.xE would outweigh any benefit from changing them around, forcing us to learn a new ruleset.

Being "100% compatible" was never one of their stated goals. They want to be compatible and minimize conversion work, in a nutshell.

Classes: "Cleaning up" isn't what a fix should be about. If there were any broken features (and there were) those should be fixed, and that's it. Saying "Our Pathfinder Fighter is better than the 3.xE Fighter" is just introducing power-creep right then and there. Not all games use the full plethora of splat-books. Fixing Druid's Wild Shape, on the other hand, is a real need.

It's not just an issue of "cleaning up" or "fixing stuff" - it's an issue of "making the classes more fun to play". Clerics, sorcerers, and wizards get NO class abilities beyond spells, turning, and a few bonus feats (I'm not counting familiar as a class ability, because it's not worth mentioning). Fighters get nothing besides bonus feats. Sure, they can be fun to play... but what prevents players from PrCing out at the first opportunity?

Spells: Both fixing individual spells and getting rid of Save-or-Die sound good! :-) Assuming the changes are fully integrated into the text, this is the kind of change we're looking for!

Regarding spells: one of the major headaches of high-level 3E play is the multitudes of spell effects, all with different durations. Is this (possibly the most crucial) aspect of the game changed (so you don't have to count rounds for a dozen spells simultaneously)?

You could DL the beta and find out yourself.

Combat: If I understand you correctly, Pathfinder will attempt to unify certain maneuvers. Correct? If so, great. As long as the game only changes for aspects that caused trouble, that is. Changing grapple would be wonderful; messing with BAB or iterative attacks would be disastrous.

It has, and it's one of the few changes I actually like. They did a really good job cleaning up that mess.

Magic Items: okay, so I'll wait on this one. Of course, unless the change really trims the Christmas tree, it should not be made at all.

They changed it so that all stat-boosting items can be put into one of two slots - head and belt. The bonus you gain is a "temporary bonus" for 24 hours, then it becomes permanent.

No XP costs. Again, I'm not sure I understand what was broken to such an extent, a "fundamental" change was needed. Are you sure this isn't just designers wanting to put their mark on the fix, thus breaking compatibility...?

I don't see how a lack of XP costs breaks compatibility. It's a fairly common house rule, and definitely needed. XP costs were one of the DUMBEST things ever to appear in D&D, because they screw over spellcasters who might actually want to make stuff for themselves or their friends.

Skills: I read that other thread, but came away confused. Not a good sign the change is really worth it. I must say, the 4E skill approach is sufficiently effective at reducing clutter to be worth it. I sincerely hope Pathfinder isn't just a conservative messing about that only accomplishes incompatibility while still not making things so much more easy it's worth the switch...

PF dropped the ball on this one, IMO. They combined a bunch of skills that needed it, but they also combined some stuff that made people go "WTF?" like Concentration and Spellcraft. Perception now covers all five senses, not just sight and sound. They added Fly. There are some others, but that's what I've got off the top of my head.

In summary, I fear Pathfinder will be as compatible to 3.5E as 3.5E was to 3.0E. Which is to say, not very compatible at all.

You mean 4E and 3E? 3.5 was nearly 100% compatible with 3E - all they did was tweak a few spells, add some stuff to a few classes, and make minor changes to monster statblocks.