Wait what version do we play?

[Akisa]

We play a combination of 3.5 and PF and I was wondering which system do we actually play?

Classes: PF or 3.5 if PF not available.
Skill: PF
Grapple, trip: 3.5!
Feats: Mixture
Spell: 3.5
Setting: Homebrew.

I want to say PF. (note I just posted this because I'm bored on a road trip as a passenger).

[Luckmann]

What "version"?

You're playing a mix of PF and 3.5.

[mootoall]

I believe the colloquial term is 3.PF.

[shadow_archmagi]

You're playing a hybrid, obviously.

[Grendus]

Take your pick, you're either playing 3.5 with pathfinder transparency or pathfinder with 3.5 transparency. The two systems are fully compatible, aside from a few rule changes that work well enough both ways.

[Tetrasodium]

just curious, why 3.5 grapple/trip?

[Akisa]

Because we felt is was a nerf and was so use to 3.5 grapple rules.

[The Glyphstone]

Better math, maybe? PF simplified the process of performing combat maneuvers, but did so in a clunky way that made them even more difficult to accomplish than they already were.

[Callista]

Yeah, what's wrong with saying you're using a mix?

But make sure you clue your players in about exactly what's coming from which system.

[Tetrasodium]

Because we felt is was a nerf and was so use to 3.5 grapple rules.


I usually played caster& such in 3.5, so grapple/trip was one of those things I never really learned. how do they differ "nerf"wise?

[Callista]

It all depends on whether you optimize for grappling or not.

[Luckmann]

For the purpose of thread classification, I generally consider:

[PF] = Pathfinder/only.
[3.P] = Pathfinder and/or 3.5.
[3.5] = 3.5/only.

[Talya]

I think...if I were to mix the two, I'd use:

3.5 spells
3.5 bardic music
3.5 general mechanical rules
PF classes/features
PF Skills
PF Races/favored class
3.5 classes/races if not in PF
3.5 feats if they don't exist in PF