You know, I took a long look at my 2nd edition books after you asked this question and as I looked, I realized that there isn't that much of a difference (that I could find). The weapon and non-weapon proficiencies are just precursors to skills and feats. So, I don't know. Maybe it's just a nostalgia thing. Eric, any comments? I don't see anything that really restricts Pathfinder compared to 2nd edition. The rules are a little more intricate. I guess if you factor in the idea of using flip maps and figures, you have less role play and it's more of a battle/strategic game. I don't have ANY 3.0/3.5/4.0 D&D books, so I can't really compare those. I just have Pathfinder and the old 2nd Edition stuff.I'm curious what was more RP friendly from 1st/2nd compared to 3rd. Honest question, wondering what stood out to you as more RP friendly / encouraging RP, whichever you prefer to call it. And are you going more 1st, or adding in proficiencies and such from later 1E and then 2E products?
That is pretty cool. Although, I would like just the old all in one original book, but the 1st edition DMG is STILL an amazing book with so much information. I guess they realized that if the new edition flops, re-release the old stuff.Maybe they are learning - releasing 1st edition books again:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx ... axmemorial