Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aus_Snow" data-source="post: 5433417" data-attributes="member: 29112">Pathfinder is kinda like AD&D in some ways.I think what is needed is something a lot more like B/X, or BECMI perhaps. Basic D&D, anyway.The key thing here is that NEW players, WITHOUT GMs to show them the ropes, should be able to pick up this book, these books, this box set, these box sets - whichever - and, very soon indeed, *start playing*. Not necessarily talking gearheads here, fans of mathematics, engineers-in-the-making, IT types, etc. Just, y'know, people. Oh sure, people willing to try something a little different, and yes, to use their minds. But, most importantly, use them in *creative*, *ingenious* ways. Slogging through hundreds of pages of dull, intricate, sometimes counter-intuitive rules? Not appealing to most people - this might come as a surprise to some, but it's true.Straight into the action. Straight into the roleplaying, the exploration, the creative problem-solving. None of this "Uh, how does this rule work again?" kind of crap. It just gets in the way, and will quite possibly turn folks off RPGs for life.So yeah, definitely KISS and make up [the numbers that should already be there].I like the idea of a modular RPG. So, a basic core, easily extensible to the advanced version (i.e., Pathfinder Fantasy RPG). And likewise, it should be a trivial matter to work "backwards", as it were. Or "downwards", perhaps, in terms of complexity.Some would be perfectly happy sticking with the basic game. And why not! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /> Nothing wrong with fast-paced combat, a sleek, streamlined system, a more disciplined yet compelling approach to magic and magic items, and so forth. Even so, I can't see Pathfinder faltering, losing sales to its svelte sister. So to speak. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> Maybe other games will be "endangered", and that will be for the company/ies concerned to sort out... if they can. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Quite excited at the prospect of this new game. And hey, if it's basically 5 levels a box of more or less standard PFRPG, well. Never mind. It will still be very interesting to see how it goes. It's just that *I* wouldn't be buying in that scenario, not even for others. Doesn't mean that applies to anyone else, though! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification