amaril said:Do we forget that Monte Cook is the name on the cover of the original 3.0 core rulebooks?
trancejeremy said:Do we really need all these 4e trolls in this thread? How about 4e fans stay in the 4e section and threads, and 3x fans stay in 3.x threads...
I am a 4e fan.trancejeremy said:Do we really need all these 4e trolls in this thread? How about 4e fans stay in the 4e section and threads, and 3x fans stay in 3.x threads...
I haven't forgotten. And while 3.5 was a better game than 3.0, 3rd Edition made me excited about D&D again. Monte was a big part of that and look forward to his involvement in the design of Pathfinder, no matter how limited it might be. And I didn't dislike Book of Vile Darkness. It was one of my favorite 3.0 books.amaril said:Do we forget that Monte Cook is the name on the cover of the original 3.0 core rulebooks? I'd also argue that he has a tendency to create overly complicated game elements, too. He's also the writer of the much disliked Book of Vile Darkness.
trancejeremy said:Do we really need all these 4e trolls in this thread? How about 4e fans stay in the 4e section and threads, and 3x fans stay in 3.x threads...
I will gather my notes and post it on the Paizo site. I may also post it here and get some feedback on what I could have done differently.roguerouge said:Please post that info there, as well as a play test emphasizing the difficulties with backwards compatibility. I've been an occasional voice saying, "Remember the poor DM!" The players wanting cool new stuff for their characters are outnumbering the DMs who look at an entire world to change....
amaril said:He's also the writer of the much disliked Book of Vile Darkness.