Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gamerprinter" data-source="post: 5727833" data-attributes="member: 50895">WD, I think the problem is Palladium has a bad reputation to a large part of the market, partly because they don't listen to their fanbase, they don't update their rules. So because you are implying that Paizo and Palladium are similar - many of the responders are assuming you mean that Paizo has a bad reputation, that they don't listen to their fanbase and do not update their rules. Which is the complete opposite to how Paizo works. Paizo is arguably the RPG publisher that listens to their fanbase the most - not the least. Some percentage of Pathfinder critics think that Paizo should have come up with a completely different new set of rules, rather than a 'tweaked' version of 3.5. Not only do I think that would have been a great mistake by Paizo, if they came up with a different game - I would not be playing Pathfinder, if that is what they had done. At best Paizo does not equal Palladium - which is the heart of some of the animosity to your OP. Palladium equals bad publisher in many eyes. This makes comparing the two insulting to Paizo fans. I don't think this was your intention, but it's the only way fans can read your OP.</blockquote>