Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 4131392" data-attributes="member: 2205">:shrug:&nbsp; I don't think you know to what proportion I'm blowing it.&nbsp; All I'm saying is that I think it's a bad idea.&nbsp; I'm not threatening to drive out to Seattle, storm the Paizo offices and scalp Jason Buhlman for coming up with it, I'm just suggesting that it makes the game less appealing because it makes non-core races (of which there are a lot) gimped to the point where hardly anyone would ever want to use one.&nbsp; I think that significantly defeats the purpose of moving to the Pathfinder RPG in the first place, so I advise against it.I think reducing &quot;compatability&quot; to such a vague term that questions of balance are completely &quot;out of scope&quot; for it means that compatability become meaningless and there's no longer any point in talking about it.&nbsp; Obviously the break points are different for everyone, but they exist; the point where it's too much trouble to adopt Pathfinder at all and you just stick with 3.5 instead.&nbsp; If all the core races are bumped up to the equivalent of LA +1, then I have to either 1) only allow the core races, 2) disallow the core races, and flip back and forth between 3.5 and Pathfinder, or 3) fiddle with things to make them fit; your LA +1 solution being one way to do that.&nbsp; At some point, if I have to make houserule changes like that too often, there's no point in adopting the Pathfinder RPG at all, unless I no longer care about using large chunks of my 3.5 books anymore.&nbsp; I personally am looking for no more compatability issues (less, in fact) than between 3e and 3.5.&nbsp; To me, this is a major strike against Pathfinder and well on the verge of telling me that I'm not going to be interested in it after all.The good news is that, as you say, with a relatively high degree of compatability, I could probably still continue to use my 3.5 books with subsequent Pathfinder products, but still; if I'm doing that, then the whole exercise of creating the Pathfinder RPG is a waste of time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 4131392, member: 2205"] :shrug: I don't think you know to what proportion I'm blowing it. All I'm saying is that I think it's a bad idea. I'm not threatening to drive out to Seattle, storm the Paizo offices and scalp Jason Buhlman for coming up with it, I'm just suggesting that it makes the game less appealing because it makes non-core races (of which there are a lot) gimped to the point where hardly anyone would ever want to use one. I think that significantly defeats the purpose of moving to the Pathfinder RPG in the first place, so I advise against it. I think reducing "compatability" to such a vague term that questions of balance are completely "out of scope" for it means that compatability become meaningless and there's no longer any point in talking about it. Obviously the break points are different for everyone, but they exist; the point where it's too much trouble to adopt Pathfinder at all and you just stick with 3.5 instead. If all the core races are bumped up to the equivalent of LA +1, then I have to either 1) only allow the core races, 2) disallow the core races, and flip back and forth between 3.5 and Pathfinder, or 3) fiddle with things to make them fit; your LA +1 solution being one way to do that. At some point, if I have to make houserule changes like that too often, there's no point in adopting the Pathfinder RPG at all, unless I no longer care about using large chunks of my 3.5 books anymore. I personally am looking for no more compatability issues (less, in fact) than between 3e and 3.5. To me, this is a major strike against Pathfinder and well on the verge of telling me that I'm not going to be interested in it after all. The good news is that, as you say, with a relatively high degree of compatability, I could probably still continue to use my 3.5 books with subsequent Pathfinder products, but still; if I'm doing that, then the whole exercise of creating the Pathfinder RPG is a waste of time. [/QUOTE]

Verification