This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

What could Pathfinder have done

Started by Ruprecht, April 28, 2025, 09:19:37 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Corolinth

I'm mildly interested in Fantasy Craft.

Unfortunately, I fell out of love with the d20, so I don't see myself picking this up. I think I agree with the general idea that this should have been 4E, and that it does a better job compared to Pathfinder. At least, I think that now. I probably wouldn't have been as receptive back in 2009 when Fantasy Craft was published, for the aforementioned curmudgeonly reasons. I had more fixed and inflexible ideas of what elf game was supposed to look like, and this unholy bastardization of different classes interbreeding with each other would have been unclean back then.

Years later, I'm really not a fan of the cross-class skills, or the x4 skill points at first level. I thought Pathfinder had a better approach to that overall.

Aglondir

FantasyCraft is amazing, but it's way too complex for me these days. And I'm no stranger to complexity, having played Hero System for many years. But now I want something easier. I wish there was a "FantasyCraft Lite" that was around 30 pages or so.