| Author |
Message
|
| Zherog |
 Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 4:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
Most races still have a penalty; the only one that lost a penalty, I believe, is the half-orc.
Now, that said... I do think the racial changes is one of the big things that breaks the "backward compatibility" between PF and 3.5. (class changes being the other biggie) I can't take my elf wizard and put him into a PF game without doing a conversion.
PF definitely has a higher power curve than "vanilla" 3.5. I like it (although my group is staying 3.5), but I can understand why others don't.
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| that1mofo |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Posts: 29
|
My group just got done running both together at the same time, and we have had no problems that can't be solved with "DM (that is me) whats your rule on this?". Hasn't made me break a sweat yet.
As some others have mentioned it can be a little over powered. We run chapter two from the 3.5 PHB and pick right back up where the Pathfinder core rulebook left off from chapter 3 on.
While the "tuned up" classes seem intelligently thought out and well balanced chapter 2 is not so much.
This of course is all personal preference, as is, the direction they refined the skill checks in.
Believe it or not Pathfinder publishing resides right next door to wizards and gossip around my gaming store is the two company's actually share a very friendly business relationship.
IMHO It feels as if Wizards has no intention of letting 3.5 die off and is more than willing to pass the torch on to Pathfinder with their blessing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Amy Carrier |
| Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 588
|
| that1mofo wrote: |
Believe it or not Pathfinder publishing resides right next door to wizards and gossip around my gaming store is the two company's actually share a very friendly business relationship.
IMHO It feels as if Wizards has no intention of letting 3.5 die off and is more than willing to pass the torch on to Pathfinder with their blessing. |
That is comforting news. Even though I'm running a 3.5 campaign, I will be looking to Pathfinder for products and ideas to enhance my game. Much the same way I bought items from Judges Guild back in the old days (before TSR decided to withdraw JG's license). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| R.C, Jr |
| Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Posts: 49
|
Right now I am playing in my last 3.5 game and running my first Pathfinder game. Overall I think Pathfinder is the better system. The base races have changed, but either to better fit the flavour or make running the game easier. Take the elf. As a DM, I always hated elves being able to detect secret doors they pass because it would invariably tip the players off that there is a secret door. That's gone. Keeping the the elf, the 3.5 text said they made great wizards but combine a d4 HD with a -2 penalty to Con and you have short-lived elf wizards. Pathfinder offsets this by giving them a +2 bonus to Int. So now they are better wizards as casters, just squishy wizards.
I think the skill system works phenomenally compared to 3.5. I had fighters and sorcerers that didn't even keep track of their skills, fighters because they had so few skill points and such limited options it was useless, and sorcerers because they had so many mandatory skills and so few skill points. Pathfinder made Concentration a caster-level check and made cross-classing a viable option. I'm not crazy about all the classes they combined, and some I love.
The faster geat progression means players don't get as XP antsy. I often had players looking too far ahead to fix a shortcoming of their character, like a caster that was tired of the -4 to hit penalty for shooting scorching ray into melee. They weren't appreciating watching their characters grow because a lot of characters in 3.5 did not live up to their concept until 6th level (like archery characters, spring attack builds, etc) and did not get good at their build until 9th level. Also, anyone that wanted a prestige class had to plan out their exact feat and skill progressions pretty much from 1st level. In Pathfinder characters have their 3rd feat by 5th level and their 4th by 7th. So if you find a prestige class you like but you're two feats shy of qualifying, no more waiting until 12th level to make up for not choosing the exact feats you need already.
Overall, I'd say Pathfinder is a dream come true for 3.5 loyalists. When WotC made 4e, they looked at 3.x's flaws to make a new and improved system (from their POV). Paizo looked at what was wrong with 3.x and used it to fix and improve a system that already worked (from their POV). Personally, I think most 3.5 loyalists will eventually become Pathfinder-curious, and it's better to get in now than later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jreyst |
| Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 25 Sep 2008
Posts: 99
Location: Royal Oak, MI USA
|
| Wolfgang wrote: |
Oh, ok, there are one or two new elements in Pathfinder, and Combat Manuever Bonus and Combat Defense Bonus are two of the three (the other one is clerical channeling).
CMB and CDB are replacements for the grappling subsystem in 3.5. It's a pretty modular replacement, and to me seems like an improvement.
And they are spelled out on the Pathfinder SRD.
EDIT: Better link for Combat Maneuvers. |
Hey Wolfgang, we've been doing some site reorganizing and I noticed this link. The new location for combat maneuvers is here (for anyone who cares lol)
--jreyst |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| that1mofo |
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Posts: 29
|
| Andrelvis wrote: |
Myself, I'm not completely happy with what Pathfinder has changed, especially in regards to eliminating racial ability penalties, and making the characters too powerful. So I haven't done the shift. However, Pathfinder DOES have some very interesting features, which I have ported over.
Overall, I feel 3.5 is still better, and taking the good Pathfinder features and adding to it makes it excellent. |
I completely feel you on the racial ability penalties, I really feel that pathfinder dropped the ball in the 2nd chapter. How ever... that is about the only complaint that I have. The rest I am pretty freaking happy with! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| R.C, Jr |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Posts: 49
|
| that1mofo wrote: |
| Andrelvis wrote: |
Myself, I'm not completely happy with what Pathfinder has changed, especially in regards to eliminating racial ability penalties, and making the characters too powerful. So I haven't done the shift. However, Pathfinder DOES have some very interesting features, which I have ported over.
Overall, I feel 3.5 is still better, and taking the good Pathfinder features and adding to it makes it excellent. |
I completely feel you on the racial ability penalties, I really feel that pathfinder dropped the ball in the 2nd chapter. How ever... that is about the only complaint that I have. The rest I am pretty freaking happy with! |
I'm confused. Half-Orcs are the only race that had their racial ability penalties eliminated. Every demihuman race now has +2 to a physical stat, +2 to a mental stat, and -2 to one stat. I think all the races are evenly powered and none are shoehorned into any one class or role. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| that1mofo |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Posts: 29
|
| R.C, Jr wrote: |
| Right now I am playing in my last 3.5 game and running my first Pathfinder game. Overall I think Pathfinder is the better system. The base races have changed, but either to better fit the flavour or make running the game easier. Take the elf. As a DM, I always hated elves being able to detect secret doors they pass because it would invariably tip the players off that there is a secret door. That's gone. |
But the Dwarf has it! I also shared your annoyance and can say that it is completely remediable. I just have my players make these rolls waaaaaaaaaay ahead of time, like as soon as they step into the dungeon. Then note whether or not they find it when they pass it, if not, they will never have a clue.
If your players start getting smart and counting the amount of rolls you make them do at the beginning you can make them roll more to confuse them, or roll for them yourself after the session is over and you've gathered up the Character sheets.
| R.C, Jr wrote: |
| that1mofo wrote: |
| Andrelvis wrote: |
Myself, I'm not completely happy with what Pathfinder has changed, especially in regards to eliminating racial ability penalties, and making the characters too powerful. So I haven't done the shift. However, Pathfinder DOES have some very interesting features, which I have ported over.
Overall, I feel 3.5 is still better, and taking the good Pathfinder features and adding to it makes it excellent. |
I completely feel you on the racial ability penalties, I really feel that pathfinder dropped the ball in the 2nd chapter. How ever... that is about the only complaint that I have. The rest I am pretty freaking happy with! |
I'm confused. Half-Orcs are the only race that had their racial ability penalties eliminated. Every demihuman race now has +2 to a physical stat, +2 to a mental stat, and -2 to one stat. |
Yeah, that is specifically what is bothering me.
First off the +2 to a physical stat, +2 to a mental stat and -2 to what ever is more than little over powered and just flat out poorly balanced.
Secondly, Their choices don't make any sense. The Dwarfs base starting age is 125 years, the Elf is 175.... yet the Dwarf gets a +2 bonus to wisdom?
A 1/2 elf can take +2 on their strength score? a 1/2 orc can take a +2 on their charisma? That is just flat out retarded!
And lastly; Defensive training, Greed, Hatred, Stonecunning, weapon Familiarity, Obsessive, are not racial traits, they are racial stereotypes. That has kinda bothered me since the conception of 3.5. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Neostrider |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 316
|
I feel the designers thought that the power creep in all of the WOTC splat books were eliminating the core races and classes. I completely agree with that too, so when they redesigned the core rules they asked "What can we do to make people want to play core classes and races again?" Ironically, the answer was to power creep.
The races are very different, but Pathfinder has a different world in mind also. The pathfinder campaign setting is so amazing and the core races were put in the rulebook to fit into this world. And that world is pretty powerful, somewhere between Greyhawk and Ebberon.
You could argue that if you wanted to play a Greyhawk world with the pathfinder rules you could use the old 3.5 races, because they're made for a greyhawk setting. Think of it like how ravenloft redefined races to fit that setting.
As far as CMD and CMB goes its better than their first proposal which was simplified (good) and impossible (bad). it was 15+ cmb was the target number, which of course meant that two people with identical cmbs would only succeed 1/4 of the time. Even worse in my mind, if someone had a cmb 5 higher than another person, one would hit half the time and the other would never hit.
I don't know how much the new CMD has fixed this problem, but its an improvement. Honestly though, I'm a bit of a rules lawyer and never found the old grappling system that confusing. I also enjoyed rolling off for the effects because it was rarely impossible to succeed. now that CMD is a flat 10 + dex + CMB it kinda assumes your opponent has rolled a 10 and you lose the chance that'd he'd have rolled low and you rolled high.
One other thing that sorta bothered me and I don't hear people mention a lot is the new +4 and +5 damage reduction rules. I guess they're alright but it'd make me sad to never see weapons made from special materials anymore.
Despite these few things I'm still really excited about the system, and can't wait to play it. I've already bought the rulebook and plan on starting a game of it very soon. Its a little bit more high power system, but I think its just enough to reinvigorate combat a little bit and make the core races & classes fun again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Zherog |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
| Neostrider wrote: |
| now that CMD is a flat 10 + dex + CMB it kinda assumes your opponent has rolled a 10 and you lose the chance that'd he'd have rolled low and you rolled high. |
I see your point here. An easy resolution is a table rule that replace the 10 with a die roll.
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Neostrider |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 316
|
| Yeah, I know. I'm not hung up on it or anything though. Like I said, I'm still very excited about playing it. the CMD seems reasonable, and I'm the only one in my group that usually bothers with special moves anyway (since they're all afraid of the rules) so I don't think its a problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| varianor |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 602
|
| Neostrider wrote: |
| One other thing that sorta bothered me and I don't hear people mention a lot is the new +4 and +5 damage reduction rules. I guess they're alright but it'd make me sad to never see weapons made from special materials anymore. |
This actually excited me! I disliked the "golf bag" from 3.5. (This is actually pretty much the same as a fix Monte Cook suggested a while ago.) Personally, I'd like magic weapons to be special, but they are more like tools than individual things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Amy Carrier |
| Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 588
|
| varianor wrote: |
| ... I disliked the "golf bag" from 3.5. (This is actually pretty much the same as a fix Monte Cook suggested a while ago.) Personally, I'd like magic weapons to be special, but they are more like tools than individual things. |
Okay, I'm back with another question: "Golf Bag"? You've really puzzled me with this one. Also, while I'm asking, what is the Monte Cook fix?
As for magic items - I couldn't agree more! I like DMing/playing in worlds where magic items are rare and wondrous, where each magic sword has its own name and history! I abhor games where magic items can be purchased in bulk from the local Discount Store and handed out like Halloween candy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Zherog |
| Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Contributor
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 586
Location: Bensalem, PA
|
The "golf bag" term was coined shortly after the 3.5 DR rules were released. The premise was that a character would carry a huge assortment of weapons in order to overcome DR -- a cold iron weapon, an adamantine weapon, an alchemical silvered weapon, etc. With all these various weapons, it would be like a golfer pulling the right club for the situation out of his/her bag.
I've personally never seen it actually happen. Characters have their melee weapon and their ranged weapon and if that doesn't overcome DR then oh well. *shrug*
I have no idea what the MC fix is, though.
_________________
John Ling
Freelance Writer
Kobold Fan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Neostrider |
| Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patron
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Posts: 316
|
I suspect the reason it became a popular complaint is convention play. Before the game even begins the adventures are expected to have all their equipment and thus there wasn't a lot of time for research and planning. If the party was fighting fey there probably wouldn't be a convenient shop once they had identified their foes.
I've found that in a weekly, at home game that almost every GM will provide the weapon, allow the weapon to be purchased before the finale, or provide monsters to fight that don't have the DR to keep the fighter happy.
That seems to me to be the problem. DR is the fighter's SR, but some fighters seem to feel they should never be affected by it. DR seems to be the one resistance can be ignored with money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
