3.P and alternatives.

[Blightedmarsh]

I know a bit about 3.5, I know a bit about Pathfinder. I keep hearing that both have significant flaws I would like to find out more about 3.P.

Where can I find a good reference guide to 3.P?
Where does 3.P drop the ball and are there good fixes for this?

I am also interested in the D20:3d6 debate Is there a recognized way to translate D20 into 3d6 and is this a good idea? Finally squares or hexes?

Would I be better off looking at one of the alternatives? If so what would you recomend

[navar100]

Flaws are subjective and depend on what you mean by "flaws".

If by "flaws" you mean issues of the 3E paradigm, something the Tier System addresses, then 3E or Pathfinder makes no difference. Either you are offended by 3E so much you hate it or not offended and play it enthusiastically house ruling away any issues you might have.

If by "flaws" you mean the specific changes to the 3E rules that Pathfinder made, that comes to a matter of personal taste. One player may hate a rule change, such as the change to Power Attack, while another player likes that change and neither are wrong. You can ask here for the specific changes and people will tell you, but whether they like the changes or not is irrelevant as to whether you like the changes. You would learn of the changes and can make up your own mind based on your taste.

However, 3E and Pathfinder are compatible with each other by obviousness. A 3.P game is either a 3E game with a few Pathfinder game mechanics or, more likely, Pathfinder game that ports in 3E stuff Pathfinder did not republish (because they legally couldn't) and/or keeping the 3E version of what Pathfinder changed, such as in some feats. What to port in is up to the individual game groups.

[Blightedmarsh]

By flaws I mean both the "mistakes" or missteps that pathfinder introduced (combat maneuvers for example) as well as those issues that where in the base game that pathfinder failed to address.

Anyway thanks for the response.

[Thomar_of_Uointer]

I know a bit about 3.5, I know a bit about Pathfinder. I keep hearing that both have significant flaws I would like to find out more about 3.P.

Where can I find a good reference guide to 3.P?
Where does 3.P drop the ball and are there good fixes for this?

I am also interested in the D20:3d6 debate Is there a recognized way to translate D20 into 3d6 and is this a good idea? Finally squares or hexes?

Would I be better off looking at one of the alternatives? If so what would you recomend

3.5 D&D SRD: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35

Pathfinder SRD: http://paizo.com/prd/

Both of these SRDs contain enough information for a group of five players to run a game without owning the books. That is a huge argument in favor of using the systems.

I think there are two major flaws in 3e D&D. First, it assumes that characters of equal level are equally powerful, ast about level 7 this is simply no longer true (spellcasters become vastly more powerful). Second, the rules for certain types of combat maneuvers in 3.5 are really complex, and lead to weird things like chain-tripping builds (Pathfinder mostly fixed this with its Combat Maneuver rules, in my experience at the table it works really well). These rule flaws are very unfair to new and inexperienced GMs, but can be addressed with good houseruling (my preferred set of houserules are Epic Six Pathfinder).

Overall, 3e D&D has a lot of good things going for it. It uses classes to define easily recognizeable fantasy archetypes. There's lots of character customization options through feats, classes, skills, and races, and tons of supplementary material. It uses levels to give players a clear idea of their character progression. It uses the D20 resolution mechanic, which is easy to teach new players and psychologically satisfying (http://www.montecookgames.com/i-like-my-20-sider/). It's good for running dungeon crawl fantasy adventures in settings where the archetypes of warriors, rogues, and mages are common. It can be applied to a broad number of other settings with minor rule tweaks (though I think D20 Modern and D20 Future were too much of a stretch). Its major flaws can be addressed through houserules.

I'm not familiar enough with 3d6 to comment on it.

3e D&D works with both hexes and squares. A good GM can get it to work with no grid at all. Squares are generally preferred. Most of the rules assume you're using squares, but you'll notice that spells use Close, Medium, and Long ranges which are really easy to fudge.

Ultimately, whether I should recommend 3e D&D to you depends on your needs. Pick a ruleset appropriate for the setting you're playing in.

[navar100]

By flaws I mean both the "mistakes" or missteps that pathfinder introduced (combat maneuvers for example) as well as those issues that where in the base game that pathfinder failed to address.

Anyway thanks for the response.

That becomes personal taste then. I happen to like Pathfinder's combat maneuvers system, and the only flaw in 3E Pathfinder didn't fix they couldn't. The flaw being Tome of Battle not being part of the OGL so that Pathfinder could update it. :smalltongue:

[eggynack]

Wait, so you're saying that you want to know what the differences between 3.5 and PF are, and what positive and negative impacts those changes had? Huzzah, for finally I can link to the handbook built for that exact purpose. Check out this handbook: Pathfinder's Peculiar Permutations (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=284344). I love it when I get to link to stuff that I've never linked to before.

[Thorvaldr]

It's kinda hard to translate d20 odds to 3d6 odds. What's nice about 3d6 is that it gives you a nice curve, with extreme rolls much more unlikely as compared to a d20.

With the d20, you have a 5% chance to roll any number. With 3d6, it varies greatly. You have about 0.5% chance of rolling 3, while a 12.5% chance of rolling an 11.

However, if the goal is to use 3d6 for D&D, that could still be done. Roll 3d6. Then decide how often you want critical successes and failures to happen. If you want them 5% of the time, then a roll of 16, 17 or 18 is a critical success, while 3, 4 or 5 is a critical failure. Want then 2% of the time? Then 17 and 18 for successes, while 3 and 4 for failures.

In general, the 3d6 system will have you rolling much closer to "10" more often than a d20.