Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jephlewis" data-source="post: 4757429" data-attributes="member: 81304">Hi!<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/249492-d-d-4th-edition-dear-wizards-coast.html" target="_blank">I've checked out 4E</a>, and there's a lot of things I like about it. I intend to house rule healing surges into 3.x, for example.However, what's wrong with paizo asking themselves, &quot;perhaps we should check out modifications to the 3.x/d20 system, and see which ones work better than stock 3.x for what we're doing&quot;?For example, the NPC creation rules in spycraft 2.0 or the backgrounds in Green Ronin's black company campaign setting are both things that I think add to the game and/or simplify the DM's load. I don't see them taking away anything.See, IF pathfinder isn't going to be 99% compatible with current 3.x stuff, then I don't see what's lost by &quot;streamlining&quot; the rules to reduce high level wonkiness, make things faster for the DM, and generally &quot;tweak&quot; the 3.x engine.I am curious though. In your opinion and your game, which of the items that I listed that I want do you not want for your 3.x/OGL game?Dnddays, I think what I personally prefer would be something similar to 4E's core rules with 3.x's customization options [for example, multiclassing]. Does that make sense?I try to focus on the positive <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />. BTW, when is trailblazer being released? Will it be offered in print or POD?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jephlewis, post: 4757429, member: 81304"] Hi! [URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/249492-d-d-4th-edition-dear-wizards-coast.html"]I've checked out 4E[/URL], and there's a lot of things I like about it. I intend to house rule healing surges into 3.x, for example. However, what's wrong with paizo asking themselves, "perhaps we should check out modifications to the 3.x/d20 system, and see which ones work [I]better than stock 3.x[/I] for what we're doing"? For example, the NPC creation rules in spycraft 2.0 or the backgrounds in Green Ronin's black company campaign setting are both things that I think add to the game and/or simplify the DM's load. I don't see them taking away anything. See, [I][U]IF[/U][/I] pathfinder isn't going to be 99% compatible with current 3.x stuff, then I don't see what's lost by "streamlining" the rules to reduce high level wonkiness, make things faster for the DM, and generally "tweak" the 3.x engine. I am curious though. In your opinion and your game, which of the items that I listed that I want do you [U]not[/U] want for your 3.x/OGL game? Dnddays, I think what I [U]personally[/U] prefer would be something similar to 4E's core rules with 3.x's customization options [for example, multiclassing]. Does that make sense? I try to focus on the positive :lol:. [SIZE=1]BTW, when is trailblazer being released? Will it be offered in print or POD?[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]

Verification