Roland55
First Post
Doesn't have to stay that way.
Here in the 21st century, everything seems to be changing ... all the time.
And change can be good.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Pathfinder 1E Paizo and 5e
- Thread starter OnlineDM
- Start date
Doesn't have to stay that way.
Here in the 21st century, everything seems to be changing ... all the time.
And change can be good.
The_Baldman
Explorer
When I was out in Seattle last month I had beers with Wotc folk. Beers with Paizo folks. Beers with Paizo and Wotc folk at the same time. It's all good. Like he said the fans are the ones with issues.
Supposedly, one of the design goals of the new edition is compatibility with all earlier editions -- and Pathfinder was specifically designed for compatibility with D&D 3.5. So if that goal is met, we should be able to mix and match material between the two games freely without Paizo making any special effort in that regard.
However, I cannot help thinking that a less restrictive license from WotC, perhaps going all the way back to the freedom and flexibility of the OGL, might open up a lot of material that Paizo might want to use but is currently not allowed to. A less restrictive or even totally open game from Wizards is, I think, the only thing that would seem likely to spur deliberate efforts towards compatibility from Paizo. For anything short of that, they are better off continuing as they are.
However, I cannot help thinking that a less restrictive license from WotC, perhaps going all the way back to the freedom and flexibility of the OGL, might open up a lot of material that Paizo might want to use but is currently not allowed to. A less restrictive or even totally open game from Wizards is, I think, the only thing that would seem likely to spur deliberate efforts towards compatibility from Paizo. For anything short of that, they are better off continuing as they are.
Gundark
Explorer
This admittedly may be a misreading, but the tone of that post made me think that if 5e is a hit they would support it (yes i know that the quote linked was stated before the 5e announcement).
I have to say that saying that there will never be a PF 2 seems ridiculous
My general inclination is:
-- Paizo should stick to Pathfinder, but be open to porting AP's to 5e, if 5e is good enough. "Good enough" in my personal definition is really close to 3.5e or PF, as close as 3.5e was to 3e.
If it's compatible, then I'm not interested, and I don't think they should bother with it either.
-- Myself, I'll stick with 3.5e, until I get around to switching to Pathfinder, or perhaps 5e, if it's "good enough". No hurry for either.
-- I'm cautiously optimistic about 5e, because I think D&D is the mirror of Star Trek: the odd numbers editions are the good ones. So far, so true.
-- If I ran the world, D&D would be a publicly traded, fan owned entity, like the Green Bay Packers, rather than an subdivision of a big company. I'd like to see Hasbro spin it off to "us" as shareholders, or failing that, just give the Greyhawk IP to Paizo. Seems unlikely, but one never knows.
-- Paizo should stick to Pathfinder, but be open to porting AP's to 5e, if 5e is good enough. "Good enough" in my personal definition is really close to 3.5e or PF, as close as 3.5e was to 3e.
If it's compatible, then I'm not interested, and I don't think they should bother with it either.-- Myself, I'll stick with 3.5e, until I get around to switching to Pathfinder, or perhaps 5e, if it's "good enough". No hurry for either.
-- I'm cautiously optimistic about 5e, because I think D&D is the mirror of Star Trek: the odd numbers editions are the good ones. So far, so true.
-- If I ran the world, D&D would be a publicly traded, fan owned entity, like the Green Bay Packers, rather than an subdivision of a big company. I'd like to see Hasbro spin it off to "us" as shareholders, or failing that, just give the Greyhawk IP to Paizo. Seems unlikely, but one never knows.
