Just a short question that was probably discussed before...
Do you think that there would be the PRPG if the 4th edition was actually more like Star Wars Saga Edition?
Just a short question that was probably discussed before...
Do you think that there would be the PRPG if the 4th edition was actually more like Star Wars Saga Edition?
Not sure about this Zmar. Some people are probably avoiding the question due to not wanting to incite any edition wars.
Try asking the question, in a nice way, in the 4th Edition forum.
Just a short question that was probably discussed before...
Do you think that there would be the PRPG if the 4th edition was actually more like Star Wars Saga Edition?
Not sure about this Zmar. Some people are probably avoiding the question due to not wanting to incite any edition wars.
Try asking the question, in a nice way, in the 4th Edition forum.
Wait wait .... let me set up the claymores before this gets started.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ok ... GO!
Oh sorry, I didn't intend to start anything like this.
In an indirect way I wanted to know how would a PRPG fare if compared to SW saga if it was fantasy. That's why I posted it here...
I would have say that there would. I've always seen Star Wars to be a differnt animal then D&D. Heck one of the reasons Saga edition didn't get a lot of fans angary was because on issues of setting Mr. Lucas was calling the shots not Wizards. Moreover the game was backwards compatable to the elder edition of Star Wars (more or less) but took most of improvements from D20 Modern rather then 3.5.
I think the real problem with 4e, in terms of the Pathfinder game is two fold.
1. Too much setting material destroyed, not just FG realms, but the very concepts of how DnD mythology developed.
2. The GSL fiasco, that I think everyone knows about so nuff said.
For me the spellcasting change certainly IS one of the problems...
|
Just a short question that was probably discussed before...
Do you think that there would be the PRPG if the 4th edition was actually more like Star Wars Saga Edition?
I can't say whether there would be a PRPG or not (since the GSL nonsense was a major factor), but I probably would not have been as interested in it if 4E had been more like Saga. When Saga was announced, it was hinted that it was a "test run" for a lot of things in 4E. So I picked it up, read through, and got really excited. I liked a lot of the changes.
4E ended up taking those changes way too far for my tastes, and making changes to the D&D canon that were absolutely unacceptable to me.
But if 4E had kept to canon, and the changes to the D20 system seen in Saga were all that occurred, I might have switched. I might not have though, if PRPG had still come out, as I really dig PRPG. Different changes, but ones I actually like more.
I certainly wouldn't feel so acrimonious towards WOTC, who have really managed to piss me off immensely in the last year.
I certainly wouldn't feel so acrimonious towards WOTC, who have really managed to piss me off immensely in the last year.
Regardless of the quality of 4e, I think WotC screwed the pooch all the way around with the way they handled 4e, Gleemax, the magazines, the DDI, the GSL - everything.