Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kerrick" data-source="post: 4600631" data-attributes="member: 4722">Bah... I can't afford 100+ dollars for the 4E books even if I wanted them, and I have little inclination to learn a new system. I'm sure 4E high-level play is smoother, but like ashockney says, it shouldn't be that hard to port some of the ideas back to 3.x.Fixing it on its own, without touching the rest of the system? No. Working from the ground up and restructuring the entire framework of the game? Possibly. It is a lot of work, but I was bored and needed something to keep me busy. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Sure! Any help you're willing to offer is much appreciated. Drop me a PM with questions, so we don't clutter up this thread with off-topic stuff. Oh, and check out the forum I started for folks doing revisions of 3.5 material: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/society-3-5-revisionists" target="_blank">Society of 3.5 Revisionists</a>.We are, more or less... we're just taking different paths to the end result. Pathfinder is most interested in staying close to 3.5 so they can keep the largest part of the crowd who plays it; since I'm not interested in publication, it's given me more freedom to make changes as necessary, without being bound as much by backwards compatibility. UK (if I may speak for him) is mostly adding new content, but since the faults in epic have their foundations in the lower levels (IMO), there's only so much he can do to &quot;fix&quot; epic play. Wulf Ratbane is also doing some kind of revision work; he's let slip several hints about a project called Trailblazer, and said it's intended for use with 3.5/Pathfinder, but little beyond that.I don't have Skype, but I could do IRC.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kerrick, post: 4600631, member: 4722"] Bah... I can't afford 100+ dollars for the 4E books even if I wanted them, and I have little inclination to learn a new system. I'm sure 4E high-level play is smoother, but like ashockney says, it shouldn't be that hard to port some of the ideas back to 3.x. Fixing it on its own, without touching the rest of the system? No. Working from the ground up and restructuring the entire framework of the game? Possibly. It is a lot of work, but I was bored and needed something to keep me busy. :p Sure! Any help you're willing to offer is much appreciated. Drop me a PM with questions, so we don't clutter up this thread with off-topic stuff. Oh, and check out the forum I started for folks doing revisions of 3.5 material: [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/society-3-5-revisionists]Society of 3.5 Revisionists[/url]. We are, more or less... we're just taking different paths to the end result. Pathfinder is most interested in staying close to 3.5 so they can keep the largest part of the crowd who plays it; since I'm not interested in publication, it's given me more freedom to make changes as necessary, without being bound as much by backwards compatibility. UK (if I may speak for him) is mostly adding new content, but since the faults in epic have their foundations in the lower levels (IMO), there's only so much he can do to "fix" epic play. Wulf Ratbane is also doing some kind of revision work; he's let slip several hints about a project called Trailblazer, and said it's intended for use with 3.5/Pathfinder, but little beyond that. I don't have Skype, but I could do IRC. [/QUOTE]

Verification