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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GreyLord" data-source="post: 6217704" data-attributes="member: 4348">I'd imagine it's because Paizo has NOT created anything for D&D outside of the Pathfinder and 3.5 lines.  This is my supposition on what the author was thinking of, and in that light, Paizo hasn't really come out in support for what some consider the REAL D&D/AD&D as opposed to D20.Now, this is what I think he may have been referring to, NOT THAT I AGREE completely with his conclusions.  Taking the devil's advocate here however, he is correct in that Paizo has not really supported anything but the Pathfinder line, and with that, it is questionable whether they would be any better of a steward over D&D.  Remember, WotC at least has the PDF's and REPRINTED the older edition core books.Now, my thoughts on the matter.  First, Paizo is under no obligation at this point to support anything but their own products.  In fact, they may get in legal problems if they try to support something that they do not have permission to support.  They DO already have OSRIC and some OSR on their site for sale...that's somewhat promising.   Therefore, I think it's VERY easy to see why they may not indicate great support for the other editions, as that's an easy way for some legal problems with WotC...and that's NOT what they want or need.Also,aAs I already remarked, I think Paizo would make great stewards over the D20 versions (I think they may even do well with supporting a character builder and such for 4e maybe, and perhaps with better programming than what WotC had).HOWEVER, with older versions, it's a REALLY iffy proposition.  Many of them were with the WotC that had the aim to KILL OFF our beloved AD&D.  At least, that's how MANY see it, and how many STILL see it, even to this day.  Many of those gamers hadn't bought a book in years (if not decades though) as once you have the core books, why buy new ones or anything more with AD&D?   In fact, even with the new premium releases, I STILL saw that sentiment from many of the older players that WotC lost in it's transition.  Is it really worth trying to get the dollars of a million or two (or more) players that have no interest in the current hobby scheme, hobby shops, or anything that modern RPG's are offering, and typically don't spend money on anything new?So, though there may be many of them, what they'll buy is another question.  On the otherhand, I think we see the same thing happening with the older (yes, they are older now) 3e/3.5 players.  Many of them bought the core books, and never really bought all the supplements and such that WotC released.  I think 4e's idea that everything was core was to try to get past this thing which players do, which is buy the core book and never get anything beyond that.Pathfinder took a different slant, which is to provide adventures (I mean, that's not new rules, that's just additional adventure and stuff you can buy that adds nothing to the complexity or anything else of the game).  I like this model, it's a grand model.If they did that for older editions, if they were the stewards, it may work, I don't know.  It's that type of support that I'd hope they would have...but I don't know...I have no idea if they would do that or not.ON A DIFFERENT point...as far as PF creating it's own game...I view Pathfinder as a totally and completely different game than Dungeons and Dragons.  It has it's roots (DEEP and STRONG roots even, basically even the same trunk and branch even) in the 3.5 edition, but there are vast changes in it that I feel make it a better game.  The very way skills are determined at character creation, the way feats have been modified, the way the spells have been modified, how certain classes differ (in regards to hitdice, and other basic factors) in my mind, makes it a very DIFFERENT game than the Dungeons and Dragons that gave it birth.We consider Palladium a different game than D&D, we consider most of the D20 games different games than D&D, and yet many of them are more similar than PF is to 3.5 to D&D (of course D20 was far more different from AD&D and 4e was far more different from 3e than most of those other systems as an opposition to my opinion, just to present both viewpoints), hence, why don't some consider PF it's OWN system able to stand on it's own.Sure, it has compatibility, but at the same time, it is different enough, or perhaps we should call it evolved enough, that it truly stands on it's own as it's own game system.In my opinion of course.</blockquote>

Verification