Pathfinder?

[Origomar]

I learned about a tabletop club at the college im going to and i asked them what they were currently playing, and i got a response saying that they had several campaigns going on(im not sure if they are like campaign settings from books or not, a few examples given to me were Council of Thieves, and Legacy of Fire).

Anyway i told them i was mildly affluent in 3.5, and i got a response via email detailing the current sessions and noting that pathfinder was like an updated version of 3.5.

Is there a place where i can get a SRD for pathfinder and is it really like an updated 3.5 or is that an oversimplification, and if so how do 3.5 books translate into pathfinder?

[Arbane]

I learned about a tabletop club at the college im going to and i asked them what they were currently playing, and i got a response saying that they had several campaigns going on(im not sure if they are like campaign settings from books or not, a few examples given to me were Council of Thieves, and Legacy of Fire).

Anyway i told them i was mildly affluent in 3.5, and i got a response via email detailing the current sessions and noting that pathfinder was like an updated version of 3.5.

Is there a place where i can get a SRD for pathfinder and is it really like an updated 3.5 or is that an oversimplification, and if so how do 3.5 books translate into pathfinder?

Here's the SRD. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/)

Pathfinder is pretty much "D&D 3.75" - it ups the power level a bit (everyone gets a feat every other level, not every 3 levels, squishy classes have better hit-dice, and so on), simplifies the skill-list a bit, and doesn't have nearly as many game-breaker combinations as 3.5 accumulated...yet. Wizards are still the Most Powerful Class, but most classes got a bit of an upgrade.

There's enough small rules changes that a direct translation is possible, but might get confusing. (Combat manuvers work differently, some save-or-cry spells now allow a save every turn, etc.)

Obviously, you should ask the GM before you try to import any D&D stuff that isn't already in PF.

From another thread:



For general PF advice, make sure you read the rules for CMD and CMB a few times; almost anything that gets added to an attack roll gets added to CMB and most things besides armor/natural armor/shields and size modifiers that are added to AC are added to CMD.

Players very rarely get dead levels. Prestige classes are generally unnecessary. Races generally end up with a net +2 to stats; Half-Elves in particular got a big boost. Alternate racial features are fun, but be careful about overwhelming new players with too many choices.

Cleric is to Oracle as Wizard is to Sorcerer; Oracles can actually be better than Clerics at some things (blasting comes to mind), if you're trying to avoid tier 2 classes.

New tier 3ish classes include the Magus, Alchemist, and Inquisitor.

[Origomar]

lol it got moved to the dnd 3.5 section, i think thats also confirmation.

Anyway what is a fairly simple/less new stuff to learn class in pathfinder?

I usually like to play beatsticks in 3.5, but im familiar with almost all the core class mechanics.

[Belril Duskwalk]

Anyway what is a fairly simple/less new stuff to learn class in pathfinder?

I usually like to play beatsticks in 3.5, but im familiar with almost all the core class mechanics.

Fighters are largely unchanged. As they level up they add a few pluses with weapon groups that you select and take less penalty from armor. Some of their favored feats like Power Attack and the various Improved Combat Maneuver feats have been altered but that's about it.

Barbarians are probably among the least changed. Their Rage lasts slightly longer and they gain Rage Powers, which are special bonuses that activate when they are in a Rage and that is all I can find different.


On a more general note, it should be noted that the skill system and favored classes also got a re-vamp. No more half-points for cross-class skills, now a point is a point. Instead, putting at least one point in a class skill nets you a +3 bonus in that skill on top of ability modifiers and ranks. Taking a level in a favored class now nets a bonus to HP, Skills or other attributes.

[legomaster00156]

On a more general note, it should be noted that the skill system and favored classes also got a re-vamp. No more half-points for cross-class skills, now a point is a point. Instead, putting at least one point in a class skill nets you a +3 bonus in that skill on top of ability modifiers and ranks. Taking a level in a favored class now nets a bonus to HP, Skills or other attributes.
Also, maximum ranks in a skill are equal to HD, rather than HD+3.

[Eldariel]

lol it got moved to the dnd 3.5 section, i think thats also confirmation.

Anyway what is a fairly simple/less new stuff to learn class in pathfinder?

I usually like to play beatsticks in 3.5, but im familiar with almost all the core class mechanics.

Least changed class is probably Wizards. They got few mostly irrelevant extra trinkets but by and large everything important from casting mechanics to casting stat to the spells themselves is the same. Specialists got a buff (can cast prohibited school spells at an extra cost) and all specializations got few class features.

Most importantly tho, most of the spells are the same so if you knew a 3.5 Wizard, you'll be right at home in a PF Wizard (there are minor and even few major changes here and there but by and large everything is as in 3.5).


Fighters are somewhat similar; their numbers got increased but the basic class mechanics are the same. Monks got significant buffs to be on the Fighter-level (and some archetypes that push them even further near the Bard-level), Barbarians got changed around a tad (more customizable now), Rangers and Paladins became somewhat more competent at what they do (especially casting) and Rogues & Bards are changed but similar to before.

Druid Wildshape got significant nerfs though they're still amazing, and Cleric's melee ability took few hits (can't wear heavy armor anymore, Divine Power doesn't make up for losing BAB, etc.) though both are still more than fine. And uh, there's few new classes of interest; Summoners are kinda Druid-like though their casting is mostly worse (they get Summon Monsters on time tho). The eidolon is a really mean customer tho and Synthethists are like customizable Wildshapers. And Oracles and Sorcerer Clerics with some pretty darn decent class features to make up for their retarded casting.

[Deathkeeper]

The eidolon is a really mean customer tho and Synthethists are like customizable Wildshapers. And Oracles and Sorcerer Clerics with some pretty darn decent class features to make up for their retarded casting.

What's wrong with the Sorcerer's casting? I personally prefer the "fewer spells known but more per day and no preparation" that the Sorcs have. I mean, I know the Wizard is better in most ways, but both work out fine in most cases I've seen.

[eggs]

What's wrong with the Sorcerer's casting? I personally prefer the "fewer spells known but more per day and no preparation" that the Sorcs have. I mean, I know the Wizard is better in most ways, but both work out fine in most cases I've seen.
Retarded means slowed.

[Corlindale]

Yeah, it's not that different from 3.5 apart from the additional class features for most classes.

Paladin got a huge boost in PF (Smite Evil is awesome now, and Lay on Hands gives you swift-action self-healing). May be a nice option for a beatstick.

[Eldariel]

What's wrong with the Sorcerer's casting? I personally prefer the "fewer spells known but more per day and no preparation" that the Sorcs have. I mean, I know the Wizard is better in most ways, but both work out fine in most cases I've seen.

As said, "retarded" means "hindered". They're ½ spell level behind the whole game. On odd levels they cast spells a level lower than a Wizard. If it takes ~4 encounters to level, that's a total of ~36 encounters in which the character is using lower level spells than a Wizard of equivalent level would be. For no reason.

[Novawurmson]

If you like Beatstick classes, your best options are probably Ranger, Barbarian, Paladin, or Fighter. The biggest change for you will probably be the changed to Power Attack (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/power-attack-combat---final). Basically, Power Attack scales at a -1 to attack rolls for a +3 to damage rolls (assuming two-handed weapon), with an additional -1/+3 at BAB +4 and every +4 BAB afterwards.

Rangers have enough feats to use their ranger bonus feats for archery and their level up feats for melee to master both styles of fighting. Instant Favored Enemy makes them very nice damage dealers. They can trade out their spellcasting for other features.

Babarian Rage Powers changed Barbarians from "I attack it" every turn to having a few options in combat. I've got a Barbarian guide in my signature.

Paladins got a lot of bonuses: They now only rely on Charisma for class features and casting, their Lay on Hands got big buffs, they can cure status effects easier, they're immune to lots of conditions, and their Smite can absolutely wreck evil creatures. Also, they don't have to have a horsey and can instead get a spirit to enhance their weapon.

Fighters were already covered. They're still Fighters. They hit things. They get bonuses to hitting things. Yay. Movement in Heavy Armor, though.

If you want to get some spellcasting in, the Inquisitor and Oracle can both make good melee characters.

[TopCheese]

Beatsticks got... Gimped somewhat in pathfinder.

Power Attack is now static and I have yet to see Shock Trooper sooo yeah great going pathfinder.

Also most of the core technique feats that most beatsticks like to use got broken from 1 feat to 3 feats. Thus more feats don't really matter when you have more feats to take. Want to trip or bull rush? Yeah 3 feats each outside the normal prerequesites. (If you want to trip or bull rush your best bet is to go Dwarven Foehammer btw I actually love that haha).

Also one more thing. Pathfinder originally started out as a means to balance D&D 3.5, this was not accomplished and I'm not even sure they put much effort into it. Anyone who tells you otherwise aparently hasn't played the game. Throwing more stuff at a class doesn't mean that stuff is of a good quality.

What you should try to do is take the Pathfinder class that you want and then grab 3.5 feats. If you can grab the 3.5 feats then you at least can get the few gems from 3.5

I hope you have fun with your game though :)

[Novawurmson]

Beatsticks got... Gimped somewhat in pathfinder.

Power Attack is now static and I have yet to see Shock Trooper sooo yeah great going pathfinder.

You still should be doing enough damage to kill most CR-appropriate enemies in one full attack. True, you don't get the same "absurdly higher damage than opponent's health" damage multipliers that 3.5 had, but beatsticks can still do their job effectively.


Also most of the core technique feats that most beatsticks like to use got broken from 1 feat to 3 feats. Thus more feats don't really matter when you have more feats to take. Want to trip or bull rush? Yeah 3 feats each outside the normal prerequesites. (If you want to trip or bull rush your best bet is to go Dwarven Foehammer btw I actually love that haha).


Two feats: Improved and Greater. Usually the greater version has a bonus effect that you didn't get in 3.5.


Also one more thing. Pathfinder originally started out as a means to balance D&D 3.5, this was not accomplished and I'm not even sure they put much effort into it. Anyone who tells you otherwise aparently hasn't played the game. Throwing more stuff at a class doesn't mean that stuff is of a good quality.

PF did a pretty good job of fixing what it set out to do: Simplified skill system, simplified combat maneuver mechanic, classes with few/no dead levels, more balanced races, less reliance on multiclassing/prestige classing, etc. It's a patch, not a whole new game.

For example, they didn't completely fix the tier system, though it's really the Fighter and the Cavalier holding out in tier 5 if you go outside of core (Monk gets Qinggong/Ultimate Combat archetypes that arguably bring it up to tier 4). If you want to see a game that is "balanced," try 4.0. If you read over the "What did WotC get right in 3.5" thread, you'll find that most people want a somewhat unbalanced system instead of everybody getting the same thing.


What you should try to do is take the Pathfinder class that you want and then grab 3.5 feats. If you can grab the 3.5 feats then you at least can get the few gems from 3.5

I hope you have fun with your game though :)

...because Paizo did a good job of making each class seem valuable and fun, along with making numerous slight but mostly justifiable tweaks to the system.

For the record, I mostly play 3.P - mostly Pathfinder with a bit of 3.5 thrown in for fun.

[Person_Man]

Paizo marketed Pathfinder as being fully backwards compatible with 3.5. But in reality, there have been a ton of minor changes to the rules, which when taken together, make it hard to import 3.5 material without rewriting/homebrewing it in some way.

It's still a very fun game, and very similar to 3.5. It just has a slightly different feel to it, and slightly different mechanics which are annoying.

[ericgrau]

It's a spinoff. I prefer 3.5. But you can find groups playing both and they're similar enough that it wouldn't be terrible to do one or the other regardless of your preference. Some gaming groups intermix both at once.

[Deathkeeper]

Retarded means slowed.

It's a bad feeling when you realize you hear the colloquial use of a word so often that you don't recognize the word when used properly. Oh, dear.