Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aus_Snow" data-source="post: 5509617" data-attributes="member: 29112">It can be, yes. But "not-enough-rules" is pretty subjective, I would say. Also, having sensible guidelines in place of tons and tons (...) of "hard-coded" rules could be seen as a viable alternative, and in fact, more useful to more GMs. Arguably. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Sure, some hard-coded rules is a good thing. But too many? Well, this is why such approaches as the one in question here are even thought about, discussed, acted upon, on- or offline. And they are, quite often. It's not like this thread is such an anomaly... despite, on balance, its reception, gotta say. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Is it just me, or are Pathfinder fans, by and large, a little um... resistant to these things, as compared to 3e fans per se?Actually no, it must just be [some of] those here, because paizo.com seems considerably less biased thusly.Or, as I have suspected, many of those previously (definitely!) interested in just such a rules hack, have moved on, dropped off the radar, or whatever. Perhaps, if this thing gets off the ground properly, some will come back to check it out. Or yeah, if it gets done, links could be posted elsewhere - like, at paizo.com for example."Product" is a bit, er, ambitious. Also, not really the idea here. But okay, okay, taken literally as can be, the aim? Well, to make a simplified, streamlined Pathfinder, in the form of a neat, printable house rules document. For free, using the OGL, for those who are interested. That is all.If you think this thread should be elsewhere, posting about it here isn't the way to go about it - contact a mod, and they'll move it for you. Assuming they agree, natch. If indeed that's the correct protocol for this discussion, I'll not attempt to "resist arrest". <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Why not start with Castles & Crusades, or Dark Dungeons? Because I have Pathfinder in mind. Simple as that. Furthermore, if you truly require "justification" of what amounts to proposed house rules, I'd offer the observation that there's already a veritable googleplex of games of that nature. Also, if *you* wish to hack C&C or DD, who am I to stop you! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I might be mistaken - or living in the (not so distant) past... - but I really do think there is a genuine niche within a niche within a niche <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> here that could be explored and "catered to", after a fashion.</blockquote>

Verification