NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 6801953" data-attributes="member: 336">You could have done that already, the name of a mechanic is no more copyrighted than the mechanic itself, which was my point.  But you have to have your own presentation and wording for the mechanic, which is where the real level of effort comes in.  Compatibility even though very time consuming is not that complicated.  You can call a mechanic that restores hit points on a standard action, by using healing surges - second wind.  But you can't use the exact same wording that WotC used in their books.  Some try to do that by introducing different jargon, and that sometimes is easier, but not always necessary.The reason a viable clone has not appeared is simply because it is very time consuming and requires effort, and for what?  4e already has most all of the rules it needs and is a, mostly, complete product.  All that work should pay off in some way to whoever decides to pursue that endeavor, and nobody has the advantage Paizo had.The reason pathfinder rules exist in the form that they do is because Paizo was saavy and saw an opportunity to continue publishing and making money on the bandwagon they already had, and the loyal subscribers they had made during their tenure on Dragon and Dungeon magazine.  They used the SRD to keep a lot of things the same, and the OGL so they could easily use the IP.  Then they modified their own mechanics to "expand" 3.x in the ways that they saw better benefited what they wanted.</blockquote>

Verification