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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9573063" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I'm not sure how there's any other way to read the original appeal (which seems to have been taken down, as I cannot find it now). I distinctly remember it coming across as Bulmahn humbly asking for players to give Paizo the benefit of the doubt in the changes.Edit: It would seem I was thinking of stuff put into the Playtest FAQ. It includes sections such as this:Sections which pretty clearly are openly saying, "Yes, X thing is a problem, we intend to address that problem, and we need your help to make that happen." There's...really no other way to read the inclusion of things like this and not get from it "3e is too broken to keep working with." Sure, some of it is obfuscated with happy-smiles-and-rainbows corp-speak, but that sort of thing is usually pretty transparent.As for "a cleanup edition", that's literally what PF1e was. Unless you mean something wildly different by that phrase, I cannot for the life of me understand how at-launch PF1e was not a cleanup of the 3e rules. Any deeper changes would've meant a loss of backwards-compatibility, which would have made it not-3e-anymore in the eyes of fans. The whole point was to preserve continuity while tidying up a few things. And it did pretty much exactly that.Of course I am, because of the number of times I've seen people openly reject anything that isn't functionally nigh-identical to 3e. 5e is 3.5e with a fresh coat of paint, no iterative attacks, and wiping the 3PP/supplement slate clean, though I will grant that it lacks the pages and pages of DC tables that I know you desire. PF1e was literally just cleaned-up 3.5e, which itself was cleaned-up 3e.This isn't a fluke. It's an established pattern. People will reject things that are not sufficiently like 3e. You may not be one of those people! But they absolutely exist, and they are LOUD, and they get ANGRY and MEAN when they don't get their way.For all the (many, many, many, many) times that various people--including [USER=6747251]@Micah Sweet[/USER] just recently in this very thread--have claimed that 4e fans will only accept perfect identical carbon-copies of 4e? Yeah, in my experience, 3e fans won't accept anything that isn't 95%+ pure 3e with new paint. Make the power balance more equitable between spellcasting and non-magic characters? People riot. Fix the skills system so it isn't horrendously, painfully broken? How dare you make skills not ORGANIC anymore!!! Give every class a definite and useful area of expertise? OH SO YOU WANT TO STRAIGHTJACKET MY ROLEPLAY HUH???Over and over and over, I have seen this. The arguments never end, and by the time you're done appeasing the 3e fans, you're left with "sure, you can clean things up, but you can't touch skills or skill points, spellcasting and all spellcasting classes (especially Wizard), non-magical classes, or monsters being built by identical rules to PCs." At which point...there's nothing left to change.</blockquote>

Verification