[3.F] Contest: Pathfinder vs 3.5e.

[Yael]

I know that a lot of people prefeer PF over 3.5, I don't owe any PF sourcebook (other than Ultimate Combat, which I got to check the Gunslinger class, but I though that it still was 3.5, I was wrong).

Let's contest this for three categories:

Which one has the easiest/hardest mechanics (from ability scores, skills, classes, monsters, character proggression, etc).

Which one has the better mechanics (same as above).

Which one is more fun (of course this will vary from everyone).

I can't really tell my story because I don't have any PF sourcebook, but I could get some help: Somewhere to get the books online? :C

[Psyren]

Actually you don't need any books because PF is completely (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/) free. (http://paizo.com/prd/)

Unfortunately all of your questions are subjective so I'm not sure what this thread will accomplish besides being a sort of vague opinion poll.

[Slipperychicken]

It's not like people have to choose between the two; Just play PF, and port in anything you liked from 3.5, or vice versa. PF was built to be compatible with 3.5, so you might as well nab the best content from both.

[Dumbledore lives]

They are effectively the same system. They are both D20 with feats, prestige classes, races, overpowered spellcasting and all the minutia that is inherent in any D&D related system. For your questions I'll answer in order: They are about the same, they are about the same, they are about the same. Honestly all the little changes add up to what is basically different opinions on a few rules, the kind of stuff that is houseruled at tables generally. The main difference really is that Paizo still publishes Pathfinder stuff, whereas 3.5 stopped about 5 years ago.

[Snowbluff]

Let's see here... here's a guide to some of the changes. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=284344)

In general, I prefer 3.5. The new skills system and changes to trip/grappling are a huge turn off for me. I think all of the best stuff in 3.5 is the later material, which Paizo didn't have the rights to publish. :smalltongue:

[Coidzor]

Saph also put out a 3.5/PF handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7607362#post7607362) earlier on.

I have issues with both systems and would prefer to just devote time to coming up with my own set of extensive houserules to blend 3.P together in a way that fits with my sensibilities. It's kind of a daunting prospect so right now I prefer to use 3.5 while taking things from PF and kludging them to fit as things come up.

But I'm kind of weird in that there's even things from 4e that I'd consider backporting, such as receiving Constitution + X HP at first level and having death at negative-some-number-other-than-just-10-for-basically-every-single-character.

Edit: And another thread on the subject of the changes and differences. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=284344)

[ArqArturo]

A similar discussion came with my players over the 3.5 paladin, and the pf paladin, and why the 3.5 paladin is better. These are their points, though:

3.5 Paladin
- Tons of PrCs that benefit the paladin
- Turn undead gives you the chance to killing undead faster
- Lay on Hands could increase healing chances quicker

PF Paladin
- There's no PrCs that support the paladin, and the archetypes are a joke
- Channel Divinity does not kill undead in one hit
- Lay on hands is dice-dependant, therefore, it's no longer that powerful.
- The only way to make a good paladin, like a 3.5 paladin, is to use the Oradin build, and that is not a straight paladin
- Any class can make better use of the paladin-like abilities than the paladin himself, therefore, he no longer brings anything different to the table.

However, I argued the contrary, that the PF is better, because:

- Smite evil is no longer a one-hit wonder as it was before
- Channel divinity actually lets you heal several allies
- Better saves
- The fact that he gets an aura to protect from enchantments makes him a better tank
- A good number of archetypes are useful (such as the Oathbound paladins).
- The Oradin's base is the paladin, not quite the oracle.

3.5 has a ton of splatbooks, and I'm just thinking of the official ones. What PF brings is that, it may not have that many books, but the sources are 1.- Online 2.- Free. Also, the mechanics have simplified somewhat, and they've either added some interesting rules for stuff like magic, and also revived some old ones, like called shots (which they still need revising, but ok).

[Coidzor]

I find it interesting, but often unpleasant when I encounter the way in which they clarify rules online. It just... feels messy every time I have to go to a forum post by Jason Buhlman or SKR for a rules clarification. :/ At least they're doing it though, I guess.

Also, despite having moved to a healthier version of favored classes and getting rid of the multiclass XP penalty, the devs basically hate the concept of multiclassing and prestige classes with a fiery, fiery passion. As far as I've been able to tell and encountered, this is both on a personal level as well as a professional one.

It depends on your tastes whether it's a positive, a negative, or just is, but you actually (can) learn more about the personalities and tastes of the designers, which is something that I've found I don't much like, as I prefer a bit more distance/separation between them as people and them as the source of the rules text. They feel like they have a more active hand in things, especially given the potentially byzantine nature of the varying levels of canonocity of rulings and FAQs and errata and forum posts.

[Snowbluff]

Edit: And another thread on the subject of the changes and differences. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=284344)

Yeah... I already posted that. :smalltongue:

What's the Paizo equivalent to a ninja that's not ninja? Inquisitor?

[Coidzor]

Yeah... I already posted that. :smalltongue:

What's the Paizo equivalent to a ninja that's not ninja? Inquisitor?

Whoops. Sorry, I got turned around as to which thread it was that I got directed towards that thread from and which thread I was going to share it. x.x :smallredface:

[Psyren]

Yeah... I already posted that. :smalltongue:

What's the Paizo equivalent to a ninja that's not ninja? Inquisitor?

Pathfinder has a Ninja (which is far superior to WotC's version.)

Inquisitor is a Van Helsing expy.

[Snowbluff]

@Coidzor: It's okay, bro. :smallsmile:

Pathfinder has a Ninja (which is far superior to WotC's version.)

Inquisitor is a Van Helsing expy.

Yeah, but like... it's a ninja... and they're a joke in either system. I would think something originating in PF would be better. Summoners can get good at skills. Sneak-dolon'd? :smalltongue: