Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Paizo Annoucement!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="humble minion" data-source="post: 4115445" data-attributes="member: 5948"><p>Unhelpful (c'mon, man, you WORK for Wizards - give us some examples!), but probably true, on a very small scale.</p><p></p><p>To be honest I think Paizo, regardless of their 'open alpha', will approach the big structural issues in much the same way WotC did - doing it themselves and presenting it all as a fait accompli for the community to maybe tinker at around the edges.</p><p></p><p>Paizo seem (from the alpha) to not be making any attempt whatsoever to solve magic item dependency or to be modifying significantly how high-level combat works in order to unbreak it. This has to be a conscious choice - doing otherwise would be a major undertaking and would require the sort of back-compatibility-breaking that they've already stated they don't want to do. I fully expect them to take into account outside contributions when it comes to the minutae of spells, monsters, and minor subsystems, but the really big fundamental stuff is staying as it was in 3.5e.</p><p></p><p>Non-Paizo employees will certainly get a massive amount more input into Pathfinder than non-WotC employees got into 4e (mind you, pretty much ANY input is more than non-WotC employees got into 4e...), but make no mistake, it's hard not to conclude that the fundamentals are already set in stone and the open contributions will be largely limited to bugfixes, spell, feat and monster design and the like. And to be honest if Pathfinder doesn't address the really big issues with 3.x then I'm not sure I can see the point.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="humble minion, post: 4115445, member: 5948"] Unhelpful (c'mon, man, you WORK for Wizards - give us some examples!), but probably true, on a very small scale. To be honest I think Paizo, regardless of their 'open alpha', will approach the big structural issues in much the same way WotC did - doing it themselves and presenting it all as a fait accompli for the community to maybe tinker at around the edges. Paizo seem (from the alpha) to not be making any attempt whatsoever to solve magic item dependency or to be modifying significantly how high-level combat works in order to unbreak it. This has to be a conscious choice - doing otherwise would be a major undertaking and would require the sort of back-compatibility-breaking that they've already stated they don't want to do. I fully expect them to take into account outside contributions when it comes to the minutae of spells, monsters, and minor subsystems, but the really big fundamental stuff is staying as it was in 3.5e. Non-Paizo employees will certainly get a massive amount more input into Pathfinder than non-WotC employees got into 4e (mind you, pretty much ANY input is more than non-WotC employees got into 4e...), but make no mistake, it's hard not to conclude that the fundamentals are already set in stone and the open contributions will be largely limited to bugfixes, spell, feat and monster design and the like. And to be honest if Pathfinder doesn't address the really big issues with 3.x then I'm not sure I can see the point. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Paizo Annoucement!
Top