Bardarok wrote:
pjrogers wrote:
Bardarok wrote:
The whole point of a new addition is to make progress and implement fixes which makes the game more appealing to modern audiences.
I'll just note that D&D4e was an effort to "make progress and implement fixes which makes [sic] the game more appealing to modern audiences" and leave it at that.
And so was Pathfinder 1e.
No. Pathfinder was created for two reasons.
The first was that the folks at Paizo were doing well at creating stuff for 3e via the Dragon and Dungeon magazines, but were losing the license for doing so. So they took the most popular part of those, the adventure paths, and made those the central pieces of their magazine/adventure hybrids.
At the same time, they were not too happy with the stuff they were hearing about 4th edition - both from a game perspective and from a business perspective (the rules for making 3rd-party material for 4e were a lot more restrictive than those for 3e - they became somewhat less so over time, but at that point it was too little, too late). So Paizo decided not to start making their new Adventure Path product line for 4e. But doing it for 3e wasn't going to work out either, because people would not be likely to buy adventures for a game that was out of print, at least not in the long run.
So they decided to essentially re-release 3e by republishing the SRD and giving it some tweaks along the way, but they decided backwards compatibility was a very important issue because many of their customers had buttloads of 3.5 material they did not want to invalidate. It would not be difficult for me to take, for example, Forge of Fury and run it under Pathfinder rules. Nor would it be particularly difficult to take Souls for Smuggler's Shiv and run it under 3.5e rules. Depending on how picky you are you may need to convert some monsters/NPCs, or you could just go "OK, that NPC can debuff people with the Evil Eye, cool" and not worry about converting the whole Witch class over.
