Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Treebore" data-source="post: 4736517" data-attributes="member: 10177">I agree with your over all sentiments, which is why I switched to the RPG I did.PF is caught in a rock and a hard place, it has to maintain a high degree of 3E compatibility. Plus I think another problem is that people think they will use 3E to play PF, when you will actually use PF to play 3E. Now what does that mean? Well it means that you will be using the PF rule book to play 3E, so you don't have to worry about how compatible PF is with 3E, you have to wonder how compatible 3E will be with PF.Since all the important changes will be in your new core rule book, Pathfinder, you will be referring to PF for all your spell descriptions, combat maneuver explanations, base skill explanations, etc... NOT your old 3E DMG, PH, etc...The only 3E stuff you will still be using are all the splat books, so their feat descriptions, new skill descriptions, new spell descriptions, etc... will still be just as viable as they are if you remain with the original 3E Core rule books.Remember, Pathfinder is going to be the new core rule books for new players, and for those who like the PF changes better than how it is done in core 3E.Pathfinder is not meant for those who are staying 3E and have plenty of books for new players to use. Those people are set for as long as they wish to stay with their 3E core books. They should have minimal problems using Paizo adventures if they wish to have a source for new modules. Same goes with Monster Manuals such as Tome of Horrors, etc...Paizo obviously hopes even these people will decide its just much more convenient to fully switch to using Pathfinder as "Core", so they can use such resources seemlessly, but it will still be compatible enough to use PF pretty easily with 3E as their core.I also imagine Paizo will do different lines of modules, one line will be much like any 3E module they have done, essentially sticking to pure 3E SRD type material. Other lines will be aimed at having complete control of all sources, so will have classes from any of their resources, any monsters, any PrC's, and they will have any feat or skill, allowing for even more flavorful and unique adventure scenarios and setting ideas.However, I also like not be limited to feats, and skills. So I use C&C (Castles and Crusades) which allows me to use 3E, and 4E, products. So when I use a cool 3E monster, or PF monster, or even 4E monster, their feat or power just means to me they can make either a SIEGE check to make a maneuver that gives them that bonus/power, or I can just label it as a monster ability or power, and just add it as part of some special attack, and in the case of skills simply treat it like a class skill. Which is why C&C is so compatible with other editions.Plus this allows a 1st level fighter to try anything, whether its modeled after 3E or 4E feats, or 4E powers, and no one has to track lists of feats or powers, or skills for that matter. All we use those lists for are ideas as to what kind of things we can try to do, and what kind of modifier a successful roll will give.So even though I like what PF is doing to the 3E rules, it still doesn't allow for the "try anything" feel I fell in love with back when I started playing in BECMI and 1E D&D, so I stick with C&C as my core and I'll just keep using PF products as I want them. Not to mention good ideas in 4E.</blockquote>

Verification