Pathfinder 1E If Paizo can, why can't Wizards of the Coast?

[Mournblade94]

I disagree about the ease of converting to 3e from 0e, 1e, or 2e.

In fact, I would bet if you sit two experience people down, and give each whatever existing paper or electronic tools are available, that the 4e guy can convert any of those old adventures to 4e much faster than the 3e guy can convert them to 3e. Particularly if it is a higher level adventure. In fact, it's entirely possibly the 3e guy will have time to work on one or two high level spellcaster conversions in the time it takes the 4e guy to convert the entire adventure to 4e.

Yes, 4e has some changes from what came before. So did 3e. In big ways.

Anyway, I am not sure how this helps further this topic. Both 4e and 3e are great games. I just think these debates go better when they are accurate. There is lots to complain about with 4e - but the speed of converting from prior adventures is simply not a well founded complaint.

It certainly may be quicker, but I doubt that the 4e character would be as true a conversion of the older editions. If you compared the final products, the 3rd edition convert would be a much closer conversion than the 4e.

The fact that 4e is faster in my mind does not make it better. I have converted many old modules to 3rd edition. For me they are simple and enjoyable labor. 3rd edition design philosophy lends itself to a better conversion of the older material.

 

[AllisterH]

That's interesting Mournblade..

I personally find 4e encounter AND monster design principles much easier to work with when converting pre 3e scenarios.

1. Monsters in 4e returning to the pre 3e method of being thei own "math" so to speak.

2. Encounters based on multiple opponents...combining CRs across even a small level range is weird at times...Much easier to say - "ok, this encounter in 1e is a easy/normal/hard level of difficulty so that means I have A/B/C mnster xp to spend.