Switching from 3.5 to Pathfinder

[JoshuaZ]

I'm about to start a campaign soon, and I'm thinking of going to Pathfinder over 3.5. However, this will be my first time DMing so I'm a little worried about DMing for the first time when it will also be with a new system.

Questions:

1) How big a deal is the switch? The impression I get is that it isn't that big, but I'd like to have some idea.

2) How does the Tier system apply to the new Pathfinder base classes roughly?

3) Is there anywhere a thread or list of the major changes between 3.5 and Pathfinder? I'm pretty familiar with the 3.5 rules, but it would be really helpful to have a full list of what is different.

4) Are there any classes, feats, PRCs or spells or other things in 3.5 that work ok in 3.5 that are wonky or broken if they are dumped with no modification into Pathfinder? Related to this, how difficult it is in general to convert feats and PRCs from 3.5 to Pathfinder; what does one need to be careful about?

[ngilop]

1) the differences are so miniscule you proably won't really ntoice any except for the following 2

1a)grapple, trip, disamr, etc now work off of CMB ( combat maneuver bonus) vs CMD (combat maneuver defense) insteadog the over complicated rules and modifers those actions( especially grapple) came with in 3rd, while its not a perfect fix, i feel it does make it easier to deal with.

1b) skill points are purchased on a 1 for 1 basis, you are regulated to you max ranks in a particualr skill = to your total hit die. you get a +3 bonus to your class skill.

1b1) some skill have been collapsed, so spot, listen and search are now all under perception. other interelated skills have alos been folded into one.

2) i see no differecne in the 'tier' system at all though paladins did get a minor buff

3) yes there is, and its on these forums, but.. for some reason GITP forums never works and breaks down to 503 errors everytime i tryt o do a search it title 3.5 to PF rules conversion or some such.

4) yes, with no modific you can be getting into some presitge classes much earlier than one could in 3.5, due to the skill re-work

the nerfed fighters so hard its not funny, PF went with the whole ' fighter just need bigger numbers; idea to fix the class then deide to give every player fighter feat progression while breaking the classic fighter feats into 2 or 3 seperate feats.

[deuxhero]

2: Witch is tier 1, Oracle is tier 2, Magus, Inquistor and Alchemist tier 3, Gunslinger and Cavalier are 4/5ish and Summoners are either 3 or very low tier 2 (they get the completely unnerfed planar binding and the Circles/Dim Anchor to support it with, among some SoX effects, PF's genesis equivlent and Gate so they meet the "ability to break the game")

For existing classes...

Paladin got a heavy bump, bringing up to at least 4 instead of 5, 3.5 content can likely take it further. Sacred Servant is tier 2 thanks to Planar Ally being planar ally.

Ranger got buffed pretty decently out of the box and was always at the very top of tier 4 thanks to 3.5 giving it good support and may make the leap to tier 3, though Wildshape Ranger is gone.

Nothing else really change much. The other classes in a vacuum would be buffed (except Druid), but odd inexplicable side change (see final line), hurt them.

4: Outside of some Arcane Trickster type classes (Divine Oracle) you won't be getting into any class "early". Remember to subtract 3 from skill requirements though (applies to feats as well). Skill Tricks are fairly odd with PF's skill system as well. You may need to adjust feat requirements for PRCs so you get in at the intended level, but that is a case by case thing and rather simple.

Also PF inexplicably nerfed a lot of melee feats by separating them. You are strongly encouraged to use the 3.5 variants.

[McToomin]

I can't speak to the tiers, but as a player who switched from 3.5 to Pathfinder mid-campaign once, I can honestly say the changes Pathfinder brings were a welcome addition. As ngilop said, the most notable difference for the player are combat maneuvers and skills. The combat maneuvers makes everything a lot easier. Every creature has a Combat Maneuver Defense that is basically a combat maneuver AC. You also have a Combat Maneuver Bonus which is what you roll vs. their CMD. Hit their CMD, your maneuver is successful. Get below it, unsuccessful. Easy.

Additionally, I love the handling of skills in Pathfinder. Cross-class skills, while I see where they were going with it, are far too restricting for my taste (you may disagree). In Pathfinder, you can get skills ranks in any skills up to your ECL, and if you put ranks in a class skill you get a flat +3 bonus. Again, simple, and now you aren't basically completely restricted from getting the skills that you want (want Stealth as a fighter? Knowledge (engineering) as a druid? go right ahead!).

[Pilo]

Well, there is a few changes that can make it hard:
Characters get feat every odd levels; concentration is not a skill anymore, it is equals to your HD number; Point-buy costs are not the same; There is favored class bonus; Half-orc and half-elf worth it now; Polymorph school spells do not replace your stats anymore, they give bonus; More things are sneak attackable...

[Saph]

Try my old 3.5/Pathfinder Handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136890). It's a little dated now but the basic changes are all covered.

[Larkas]

It's not perfect, but if you don't want to use the respective 3.5 feats for Combat Maneuvers, you might like these (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13223614&postcount=1).

I really don't recommend using the PF ones, though, they actually nerfed melee non-casters by adding a feat tax for those who want to be good at doing something in battle other than hitting things (accidentally, I guess).

[Reverent-One]

Also PF inexplicably nerfed a lot of melee feats by separating them. You are strongly encouraged to use the 3.5 variants.

And by "a lot of melee feats", you mean Improved Trip?

[Larkas]

@Reverent-One: All the combat maneuver feats, actually. The Improved Trip nerf was felt more simply because it was used more in 3.5 than all the others.

[Tyndmyr]

I'm about to start a campaign soon, and I'm thinking of going to Pathfinder over 3.5. However, this will be my first time DMing so I'm a little worried about DMing for the first time when it will also be with a new system.

Questions:

1) How big a deal is the switch? The impression I get is that it isn't that big, but I'd like to have some idea.

It's not that bad. Frankly, the biggest thing is CMD/etc. I like the skill changes, and they're usually pretty straightforward, and most 3.5 material can be dropped into PF with minimal changes.


2) How does the Tier system apply to the new Pathfinder base classes roughly?

Pretty similar. Most classes were bumped up in power, so PF base classes are usually better than their 3.5 cousins, but full casters still dominate. Druid weakened a touch, tho.


4) Are there any classes, feats, PRCs or spells or other things in 3.5 that work ok in 3.5 that are wonky or broken if they are dumped with no modification into Pathfinder? Related to this, how difficult it is in general to convert feats and PRCs from 3.5 to Pathfinder; what does one need to be careful about?

Well, you need to add the fly skill to lists where appropriate. CMD stuff needs looking at. Certain types, such as constructs, are a slight bit different.

Feats are usually pretty easy, and require little or no conversion. Most stuff that's broken with PF was already broken beforehand. Edit: Yes, using 3.5 melee feats is probably for the best. The nerfings were...unnecessary.


And by "a lot of melee feats", you mean Improved Trip?

Also stuff like Power Attack. In short, a lot of the core feats that melee took a lot were nerfed. It feels like they were trying to get better balance between melee options, and in doing so, entirely missed the larger balance between melee and other things.

[Reverent-One]

@Reverent-One: All the combat maneuver feats, actually. The Improved Trip nerf was felt more simply because it was used more in 3.5 than all the others.

Not really. Improved Trip was the only one that did more than remove the AoO and give a numerical bonus. The "Greater" feats for the rest added new abilties that you couldn't really get at all in 3.5. And while the numerical bonus is different, that's because of the math for combat manuevers changed between 3.5 and PF.



Also stuff like Power Attack. In short, a lot of the core feats that melee took a lot were nerfed. It feels like they were trying to get better balance between melee options, and in doing so, entirely missed the larger balance between melee and other things.

Power Attack was split into multiple feats in PF? Wow, how did I miss that?

[Larkas]

Just to be clear, Druids are still T1. They would still be T1 even if they had no wildshaping due to being fullcasters with a great spell list. That said, wildshape did get a lot worse due to the decreased power of Polymorph subschool and effects. But that is actually a good thing.

@Reverent-One: Ooooh, indeed. Still, they could have rolled the new stuff into the Improved feat rather than making a Greater feat and dismembering (and nerfing) Trip for symmetry.

[OverdrivePrime]

I'm curious what you guys use instead of Concentration as the skill for Diamond Mind. Having it be initiator level + con would cut down on a lot of the [gemstone] razor techniques, I suppose.

[navar100]

I'm about to start a campaign soon, and I'm thinking of going to Pathfinder over 3.5. However, this will be my first time DMing so I'm a little worried about DMing for the first time when it will also be with a new system.

Questions:

1) How big a deal is the switch? The impression I get is that it isn't that big, but I'd like to have some idea.


Skills are consolidated and no cross-class skills. Class skills mean you get a +3 bonus. Max ranks = level. A 10th level Fighter can have +10 in Perception. Many feats are changed. The more controversial ones are Power Attack and Improved Trip. I'm indifferent on Improved Trip but new Power Attack I like. You still get decent damage, and two-handed weapon fighting is no longer the only way to fight else you're The Suck.


2) How does the Tier system apply to the new Pathfinder base classes roughly?

If you're a slave to the Tier System Pathfinder does not emancipate you, but that's a rant on the Tier System not Pathfinder. Warrior classes get a lot of love, especially paladin. Fighters have class features and are worth taking to level 20. They don't suck for wearing heavy armor. They were NOT nerfed. Some people don't like particular changes to feats as mentioned earlier, but that's varying mileage not universal dislike, and new feats offer nice things. Many spells got nerfed - save or die is now save or take 10 damage per level, a few spells without a saving throw got a saving throw, many spells that provided immunity to stuff now just give +4 to the saving throw. Spellcasters get interesting class features that provide incentive not to go into a prestige class. Druid wildshape/polymorph spells got hit with the nerf bat hard. They only provide enhancement to ability scores instead of replacing and defined specific abilities based on spell level.


3) Is there anywhere a thread or list of the major changes between 3.5 and Pathfinder? I'm pretty familiar with the 3.5 rules, but it would be really helpful to have a full list of what is different.

4) Are there any classes, feats, PRCs or spells or other things in 3.5 that work ok in 3.5 that are wonky or broken if they are dumped with no modification into Pathfinder? Related to this, how difficult it is in general to convert feats and PRCs from 3.5 to Pathfinder; what does one need to be careful about?

You would need to homebrew Tome of Battle. The main thing is Pathfinder got rid of Concentration skill, so Diamond Mind needs a replacement. Martial adepts would still be more versatile than Pathfinder warriors because of their maneuvers, but the gap is a little less.

While there are prestige classes in Pathfinder, their main shtick is "archetypes" where you exchange class features for others around a theme. Many archetypes resemble 3E prestige classes, even using the same name such as Hospitaler. Pathfinder has new classes. The Inquisitor class while not as powerful a Church Inquisitor prestige class is in effect a replacement. Magus is Pathfinder's version of Duskblade. Which is better is up to the individual, but they can play nice together.

[deuxhero]

I'm curious what you guys use instead of Concentration as the skill for Diamond Mind. Having it be initiator level + con would cut down on a lot of the [gemstone] razor techniques, I suppose.

Autohypnosis works.

[JoshuaZ]

Thanks. This is very helpful. Would Autohypnosis make sense as a replacement for Concentration as the associated skill for Diamond Mind?

[Tyndmyr]

Not really. Improved Trip was the only one that did more than remove the AoO and give a numerical bonus. The "Greater" feats for the rest added new abilties that you couldn't really get at all in 3.5. And while the numerical bonus is different, that's because of the math for combat manuevers changed between 3.5 and PF.

And now we have Balors that cannot grapple another Balor. Imagine that, if you will. Two demons, both entirely unable to grab the other, despite both of them trying with all their might.

Oddly enough, 3.5 Balors, though, have almost an identical grapple modifier. Only +3 higher. Since the same number applies to their defense, grappling a balor is notably easier in 3.5. Yes, the math changed. It's accurately describable as a nerf.


Power Attack was split into multiple feats in PF? Wow, how did I miss that?

Note that I said "nerfed", not split. Power attack was indeed nerfed.

[OverdrivePrime]

Autohypnosis works.
Very smart. Thank you! I hadn't even realized that they had added Psionics to Pathfinder.

JoshuaZ - Here is the Pathfinder skill description for Autohypnosis. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/skills/autohypnosis-wis-trained-only)

[Reverent-One]

And now we have Balors that cannot grapple another Balor. Imagine that, if you will. Two demons, both entirely unable to grab the other, despite both of them trying with all their might.

Oddly enough, 3.5 Balors, though, have almost an identical grapple modifier. Only +3 higher. Since the same number applies to their defense, grappling a balor is notably easier in 3.5. Yes, the math changed. It's accurately describable as a nerf.

That depends on the creature and the situation. Balors got harder, sure, but at other times it will be the same or easier than in 3.5.


Note that I said "nerfed", not split. Power attack was indeed nerfed.

Note the post I was responding to:



Also PF inexplicably nerfed a lot of melee feats by separating them. You are strongly encouraged to use the 3.5 variants.

Which means your "Also power attack..." bit was entirely unrelated to what I was talking about, which is melee feats that got split up, not which feats you think got nerfed.