Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 8106832" data-attributes="member: 957">You are referencing the 2009 PF?&nbsp; Not sure I follow how there as much on that front between 3X and the original PF.And I never have heard anyone express that point either.&nbsp; Over and over I've heard that a fair number of 3X fans were unhappy that PH codified things as even more implicitly powerful and magic, making it even harder to go low magic.&nbsp; But nothing about GM agency.And as a veteran of the 4E-era &quot;edition wars&quot;, that was a frequent battle line.&nbsp; 4E was all about player agency and one reason (among many) that 4E was shunned was because of GM who clung to PF as a way to retain their glorious power of the lowly players.&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Anyway, pretty far off topic.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 8106832, member: 957"] You are referencing the 2009 PF? Not sure I follow how there as much on that front between 3X and the original PF. And I never have heard anyone express that point either. Over and over I've heard that a fair number of 3X fans were unhappy that PH codified things as even more implicitly powerful and magic, making it even harder to go low magic. But nothing about GM agency. And as a veteran of the 4E-era "edition wars", that was a frequent battle line. 4E was all about player agency and one reason (among many) that 4E was shunned was because of GM who clung to PF as a way to retain their glorious power of the lowly players. :) Anyway, pretty far off topic. [/QUOTE]

Verification