Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What If....4E had been a modular option sub-set for 3.5?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 6238291" data-attributes="member: 22424"><p>Like other have said, I suspect it would have disappeared with barely a whimper. Back in 2008 there were actually plenty of people (myself included) who were ready for a new edition - many of those moved on to 4e, while others didn't get the new edition we wanted and did something else (be it PF, 3e, a different game, or whatever).</p><p></p><p>Had 4e been a subset of 3e, though, I think it would still have been rejected by those who rejected 4e (most of whom I bet also rejected "Book of Nine Swords" for the same reasons). Meanwhile, those for whom 4e was a clean slate would have been denied 'their' edition.</p><p></p><p>As far as I can see, the "path not taken" that WotC could have used was for <em>them</em> to basically do Pathfinder - essentially a 3.75e. Except that, by labelling it a new edition rather than a fractional update, they would have been free to break the "backwards compatibility" claim that has tied PF into some things that they might have been better ditching.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="delericho, post: 6238291, member: 22424"] Like other have said, I suspect it would have disappeared with barely a whimper. Back in 2008 there were actually plenty of people (myself included) who were ready for a new edition - many of those moved on to 4e, while others didn't get the new edition we wanted and did something else (be it PF, 3e, a different game, or whatever). Had 4e been a subset of 3e, though, I think it would still have been rejected by those who rejected 4e (most of whom I bet also rejected "Book of Nine Swords" for the same reasons). Meanwhile, those for whom 4e was a clean slate would have been denied 'their' edition. As far as I can see, the "path not taken" that WotC could have used was for [i]them[/i] to basically do Pathfinder - essentially a 3.75e. Except that, by labelling it a new edition rather than a fractional update, they would have been free to break the "backwards compatibility" claim that has tied PF into some things that they might have been better ditching. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What If....4E had been a modular option sub-set for 3.5?
Top