Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imban" data-source="post: 4883677" data-attributes="member: 29206">Pathfinder doesn't really appeal to me as a game to play, but my current War of the Burning Sky campaign allows players to choose the Pathfinder Beta races, classes, and feats instead of the PHB ones, which is a good choice for all the races, most of the classes, and some of the feats.When Pathfinder actually comes out, I plan on getting it and replacing Pathfinder Beta stuff with it, but that's about it. I don't plan on ever running a game I call "Pathfinder", but I still tend to call my games "3e" to show that I don't particularly care about the 3.5e revision, as even though I use it for the basic rules of the game, I still allow 3.0 stuff. (And World of Warcraft stuff, and crazy third-party stuff, and...)Speaking of War of the Burning Sky, I hate to say it because I'm currently running it and love running it, but I don't... think the writers' grasp of the 4e rules is nearly as good as their grasp of the 3e rules was. This might be understandable since 3e was out for 6-7 years by the time War of the Burning Sky was written, while 4e has been out for just over a year now, but it's still an issue, so I'd recommend the 3e version.On the other hand, I don't have the 4e version of any of the War of the Burning Sky modules, so maybe - no, even hopefully - I'm actually a buffoon and my worries are unfounded. Please don't fail to give them your money and time if you're a strict 4e-only player, it's a hell of a lot better than playing Scales of War. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification