Potential pitfalls alowing 3.5 material in PF

[Yomega]

My group is starting a PF game in the next little bit and the farther the discution goes the more and more material from 3.5 is being requested by various people.

I am not entirly DMing this one but I have considerably more experience so the new DM is turning to me alot for this one (I am running the prequil lvl 0 adventure then he takes over)

So far we have aproved all special materials and a slightly tweaked factorum class

But what would be noteable areas to keep a close watch on and the potential problems that could arise from alowing a large amount of 3.5 material into the game?

[Jack_Simth]

Just that you'll inherit 3.5's problems in addition to Pathfinder's problems. There's a lot more broken material in 3.5 than there is in Pathfinder, but most of that is simply because there's a lot more 3.5 material. Pathfinder fixed some things, made others broken differently, and accidentally broke a few things all their own.

If the material in question isn't too powerful for a 3.5 game, it probably won't be too powerful for a PF game.

[Bigbeefie]

My group is starting a PF game in the next little bit and the farther the discution goes the more and more material from 3.5 is being requested by various people.

I am not entirly DMing this one but I have considerably more experience so the new DM is turning to me alot for this one (I am running the prequil lvl 0 adventure then he takes over)

So far we have aproved all special materials and a slightly tweaked factorum class

But what would be noteable areas to keep a close watch on and the potential problems that could arise from alowing a large amount of 3.5 material into the game?


Well there are things in PF that they do better then 3.5 and there is thiings in 3.5 that are stronger then PF.

Here is the major problems I run into when you use both.

When a player picks and chooses they usally will go just for the power card of each set. Like pathfinder character get feats every Odd level. That is a faster feat progression then 3.5

So what are they going to do choose a 3.5 class then use Pathfinder feat progression, skills changes, and HP changes? Are you going to be selecting 3.5 feats? Or pathfinder feats? When picking I'm sure as a player your going to check both games and go with which ever is strongest right? Why would you choose 3.5 suck ass power attack over Pathfinder's righteous upgrade to Power attack?

Basically most people make the arguement that pathfinder doesnt offer enough customization....WRONG. It has TONS...and I mean there is nothing I can't create concept wise. Pathfinder also took things from 3.5 and totally overhauled them. As well as eliminated a few of the broken things in it. (like archmage prestige class)

Spot, listen, search is now 1 skill perception.....No need to spend skill points trying to be a good listener and someone who can see a mouse move in the dark.

HP pools have been buffed for most classes....Rogues are on a d8, Wizards on a d6.

All in all I totally believe pathfinder has stronger characters too. So why go back to a wizard in 3.5 with d4 HD?

This is my honest Opinion as someone who came from 3.5 to Pathfinder......Give pathfinder a 100% try without any 3.5 material or 3rd party material. I know some players are going to cry like little bitchs cause they are sooooooo use to 3.5 But its worth it. If you play it out and learn what few differences there are you will come to like it more. And after learning the ends and outs of it you will find you can recreate alot of the 3.5 classes with archetypes of the core classes. My group refuses to go back to 3.5 material and wont ever go to 4.0 that ungodly vomit. We have been using pathfinder strictly now for 2 years.

[Larkas]

The only potential problems you can run into are players asking how to convert stuff ("This class has Search, but not Listen or Spot, as class skills. Can I give it Perception?"). Also, keep an eye for stuff that relate to things changed in PF - combat maneuvers and polymorph stuff comes to mind. 3.5 has no more broken stuff than Pathfinder. Besides, you are already substituting the most broken part of 3.5 (the core... Not that PF's is much better), everything else is relatively balanced. Even more so if you take into account that PF's base power level is a bit higher than 3.5's.

[Yomega]

Well certainly if both feats/items/anything exist in both the pathfinder vertion is the one they get for better or worse.

And kinda funny most the group only knows that pitiful bastardized vertion of the rules known as 4e

[kardar233]

I'm going to try not to be rude, but you are patently incorrect on numerous counts.


So what are they going to do choose a 3.5 class then use Pathfinder feat progression, skills changes, and HP changes? Are you going to be selecting 3.5 feats? Or pathfinder feats? When picking I'm sure as a player your going to check both games and go with which ever is strongest right? Why would you choose 3.5 suck ass power attack over Pathfinder's righteous upgrade to Power attack?

3.5's Power Attack was one of the primary abilities that made mundane melee characters even slightly competent. Even with the increased ratio of attack modifier to damage increase that Pathfinder's Power Attack gives, the total damage bonus is paltry compared to the damage increases of 3.5's, and with the generally increased health of monsters and opponents in Pathfinder the increased damage is even more important.


Basically most people make the arguement that pathfinder doesnt offer enough customization....WRONG. It has TONS...and I mean there is nothing I can't create concept wise. Pathfinder also took things from 3.5 and totally overhauled them. As well as eliminated a few of the broken things in it. (like archmage prestige class)

Pathfinder may have a large amount of customization available, but only a portion of that actually has a meaningful mechanical impact on how your character plays, and only a small subset of that have an actual positive effect on your character's capabilities.

Furthermore, what exactly is broken about 3.5's Archmage? Arcane Fire is less than worthless, as it takes up one of your precious 9th-level spell slots for a weak damage ability. Arcane Reach is only situationally helpful, as touch spells are rarely very useful, and your familiar can deliver them for you. Mastery of Counterspelling can be occasionally helpful but hardly broken. Mastery of Elements is decent as it can change blasting spells to sonic damage, but blasting isn't generally a great idea anyway. Mastery of Shaping is moderately useful, Spell Power is barely worth mentioning, and Spell-Like Ability is marginally useful if you're willing to give up a chunk of your versatility to get more casts of a single spell. None of this is anywhere near broken, especially considering what Wizards and Sorcerers can do already.


Spot, listen, search is now 1 skill perception.....No need to spend skill points trying to be a good listener and someone who can see a mouse move in the dark.

I will grant that this is an improvement, and a house rule I use in many of my 3.5 games. On the other hand, the introduction of the Fly skill is another harsh blow to mundane characters, as they not only will be bad at flying because of their armour check penalties, but they also will not be able to put points into the skill until their wealth is sufficient to buy a magical means of flight, while the spellcasters can do so as soon as the appropriate spell becomes available. Mundanes already relied on the casters' goodwill to bring them into a position to attack flying opponents, and now they are rendered even clumsier in relation to the spellcasters.


This is my honest Opinion as someone who came from 3.5 to Pathfinder......Give pathfinder a 100% try without any 3.5 material or 3rd party material. I know some players are going to cry like little bitchs cause they are sooooooo use to 3.5 But its worth it. If you play it out and learn what few differences there are you will come to like it more. And after learning the ends and outs of it you will find you can recreate alot of the 3.5 classes with archetypes of the core classes. My group refuses to go back to 3.5 material and wont ever go to 4.0 that ungodly vomit. We have been using pathfinder strictly now for 2 years.

As a 3.5 player who has tried Pathfinder and resolved never to touch the stuff, I will say that there are plenty of 3.5 classes that are difficult or impossible to replicate using Pathfinder, especially if you also want a basic degree of competence. Furthermore Pathfinder has systematically destroyed any possibilities of any of the mundane classes achieving any reasonable degree of competence or any effective tools apart from "hit the opponent and try not to die", so the players who "cry like little bitchs" are probably sad at the idea of being restricted to either playing a caster or Joe McMeatShield.


Well certainly if both feats/items/anything exist in both the pathfinder vertion is the one they get for better or worse.

I would strongly suggest allowing any players with mundane or primarily mundane characters their pick of any 3.5 material they like, whether it has been updated to Pathfinder or not. Pathfinder's casters are privileged enough to be able to go without, I would say.

[Vortenger]

For my part, and that of the two groups I play in, we play full 3.P.

Both games have issues. Both games have merits. Pathfinder's core (CMD/CMB, tumble, and acrobatics scaling rules notwithstanding) is easier and the spells are (a little) better balanced.

We don't compare and use the better feat, as said above, unless the reprint was a direct and unnecessary nerf (only real examples are improved grapple, sunder, and co.), otherwise the old feat is replaced. We just use the PF version. This prevents many of the most abusable feats ion 3.5, like DMM persist cheese (as PF has a different Persist Spell). (Also note that DMM is there, still. Just not as cheesy.)

With full integration and transparency, you have all the old material you love, and unlike 3.5, there is more content coming out for PF (and errata!). Your mundane classes get a buff all around the board (mostly) that they'll appreciate. You'll find things you need the nerf bat and ban hammer for, but hey, thats been part of our game since its inception. Use it until you really get a feel for it. Keep the stuff you like. Cut the stuff you don't. (In my case, that was CMB/CMD and acrobatics scaling. Back to 3.5 rules with you!)

[Bigbeefie]

{{scrubbed}}

[Drachasor]

{{scrubbed}}

The Fighter is a mediocre class in PF and worse in 3.5, though the Dungeoncrasher Fighter variant in 3.5 is probably better. I would know that if you are taking feats to improve combat maneuvers, then the 3.5 Fighter actually has an advantage here. PF split the feats up into 2 feats each. Beyond that there are multiple feats in 3.5 the Fighter can take to do more damage that makes the PF Fighter fall behind.

In either case, Fighters are pretty crappy in both games. PF did nothing to shore up the major problems with the Fighter (few skills, few skill points, almost no out of combat utility). In a lot of respects PF failed to shore up problems with non-casters.


{{scrubbed}}

Considering costly material components cost 10 times as much in XP with the Archmage, it sounds like you are complaining about a hypothetical House Rule rather than what the rules actually state. It is certainly a house rule that goes against the spirit of the Archmage ability. A more sensible one would be either disallowing all spells with expensive components or making a limit on what can be chosen based on the material cost (then eliminating that cost altogether).


{{scrubbed}}

You mean except the Fighter right? Actually a lot of non-casters didn't gain much or any out of combat options. Some even lost combat capability, like the Rogue who now finds it much, much harder to Tumble.


Anyhow, responding to the OP. I think the biggest common concerns would be converting XP costs in spells to GP costs, converting Polymorph spells, converting things that use old skill checks (particularly Concentration), and so forth. Also you'd probably want to allow PrCs to count as favored classes. Assuming you like PrCs. One thing 3.5 is vastly superior in is PrC quality (and probably general quality of feats.

[Yomega]

The Fighter is a mediocre class in PF and worse in 3.5, though the Dungeoncrasher Fighter variant in 3.5 is probably better. I would know that if you are taking feats to improve combat maneuvers, then the 3.5 Fighter actually has an advantage here. PF split the feats up into 2 feats each. Beyond that there are multiple feats in 3.5 the Fighter can take to do more damage that makes the PF Fighter fall behind.

In either case, Fighters are pretty crappy in both games. PF did nothing to shore up the major problems with the Fighter (few skills, few skill points, almost no out of combat utility). In a lot of respects PF failed to shore up problems with non-casters.



Considering costly material components cost 10 times as much in XP with the Archmage, it sounds like you are complaining about a hypothetical House Rule rather than what the rules actually state. It is certainly a house rule that goes against the spirit of the Archmage ability. A more sensible one would be either disallowing all spells with expensive components or making a limit on what can be chosen based on the material cost (then eliminating that cost altogether).



You mean except the Fighter right? Actually a lot of non-casters didn't gain much or any out of combat options. Some even lost combat capability, like the Rogue who now finds it much, much harder to Tumble.


Anyhow, responding to the OP. I think the biggest common concerns would be converting XP costs in spells to GP costs, converting Polymorph spells, converting things that use old skill checks (particularly Concentration), and so forth. Also you'd probably want to allow PrCs to count as favored classes. Assuming you like PrCs. One thing 3.5 is vastly superior in is PrC quality (and probably general quality of feats.


Most of what you say makes sence altho I dont undetstand your reasoning for favored class option for prc pathfinder already has prc and they specificaly exclude favored class bonuses for them short of 3.5 simply has more prc

The game got bumped up so we are going have less 3.5 materials overall and aproved on a case by case basis so far they include : special materials, converted factorum class and a few related feats (font of insparation), and monkey grip feat (aproved only for a odd gish sorcerer)

[Bigbeefie]

The Fighter is a mediocre class in PF and worse in 3.5, though the Dungeoncrasher Fighter variant in 3.5 is probably better. I would know that if you are taking feats to improve combat maneuvers, then the 3.5 Fighter actually has an advantage here. PF split the feats up into 2 feats each. Beyond that there are multiple feats in 3.5 the Fighter can take to do more damage that makes the PF Fighter fall behind.

In either case, Fighters are pretty crappy in both games. PF did nothing to shore up the major problems with the Fighter (few skills, few skill points, almost no out of combat utility). In a lot of respects PF failed to shore up problems with non-casters.


The class name is fighter....You fight things....you want him to be able to cast spells? How about lie, cheat, steal, and tumble his way to victory?

The falling behind damage I still don't see it I can take a Level 20 fighter in PF with just combat feats (no maneuvers) and the 2 Handed fighter archetype and basically Auto Critical a scythe for x5 multiplier usually resulting in slightly over 300 Damage, your stunned and blinded after the damage...if you play massive damage rules they die, and most stuff wont survive that much damage...if they somehow survive they are blinded and stunned, all off the first charging hit...Just to be done again round after round on a stunned and blinded target.


Considering costly material components cost 10 times as much in XP with the Archmage, it sounds like you are complaining about a hypothetical House Rule rather than what the rules actually state. It is certainly a house rule that goes against the spirit of the Archmage ability. A more sensible one would be either disallowing all spells with expensive components or making a limit on what can be chosen based on the material cost (then eliminating that cost altogether).

Actually it would need to be specified what rules your using...Like I said if you use Pathfinder no XP costs it would be ridiculous. But in 3.5 spending XP was a common thing for crafting and abilities like Archmage's Spell-like ability. As a DM they would need to nerf it themselves and make clear the XP rule.

But going as far as banning all spells with expensive material components seems WRONG...no more True resurrections, Greater restorations, ext ext.... then...sorry if you died we banned all expensive material spells.

No tons of Rulings come up when you mix the games so much and I highly disagree with using them together..this was an opinion piece and my opinion is not to cross the 2 ever...my group doesn't do it and I wouldn't play in a group that crosses them ever. Id play each on its own with its intended rules over the un -known rules fest and problems that will ensue from mixing the 2.

[Psyren]

The optimization ceiling is much higher in 3.5 than it is in PF for all classes; a contest between a 3.5 class and a PF class won't prove anything except who can win rocket tag against who.

PF's advantages come more in the form of quality-of-life boosts. Things like Fighters being able to craft their own gear now, or a sentry/guard-type fighter that can actually be semi-decent at maintaining a lookout thanks to cheaper cross-class skill costs, higher cross-class skill caps and skill consolidation. An optimized 3.5 fighter will crush them in damage output (and most everything else - hi Incarnum!) but the PF Fighter is a much better pick-up-and-play class where such tricks aren't needed to contribute to a party.

[georgie_leech]

The optimization ceiling is much higher in 3.5 than it is in PF for all classes; a contest between a 3.5 class and a PF class won't prove anything except who can win rocket tag against who.

PF's advantages come more in the form of quality-of-life boosts. Things like Fighters being able to craft their own gear now, or a sentry/guard-type fighter that can actually be semi-decent at maintaining a lookout thanks to cheaper cross-class skill costs, higher cross-class skill caps and skill consolidation. An optimized 3.5 fighter will crush them in damage output (and most everything else - hi Incarnum!) but the PF Fighter is a much better pick-up-and-play class where such tricks aren't needed to contribute to a party.

This more or less sums it up; allowing 3.5 material carte blanche is likely to drive the power curve of your game up. It might be a good idea to ask why a player wants any given 3.5 feat/class/other, and see if there isn't a way to make it work using Pathfinder material if you're concerned about that kind of power creep.

[Drachasor]

The class name is fighter....You fight things....you want him to be able to cast spells? How about lie, cheat, steal, and tumble his way to victory?

Social skills would not be amiss. You're the one that brought up out-of-combat stuff as better in PF....and yet it isn't.


The falling behind damage I still don't see it I can take a Level 20 fighter in PF with just combat feats (no maneuvers) and the 2 Handed fighter archetype and basically Auto Critical a scythe for x5 multiplier usually resulting in slightly over 300 Damage, your stunned and blinded after the damage...if you play massive damage rules they die, and most stuff wont survive that much damage...if they somehow survive they are blinded and stunned, all off the first charging hit...Just to be done again round after round on a stunned and blinded target.

Most people aren't going to be 20th level for one. And the auto-crit at 20 is a huge boost, but the vast, vast, majority of PF fighters won't see it. So largely you are going to be comparing Charging Feats and Power Attack, and 3.5 is far superior in feat power there, more than enough to make up for the relatively weak boost PF fighters get.



Actually it would need to be specified what rules your using...Like I said if you use Pathfinder no XP costs it would be ridiculous. But in 3.5 spending XP was a common thing for crafting and abilities like Archmage's Spell-like ability. As a DM they would need to nerf it themselves and make clear the XP rule.

But going as far as banning all spells with expensive material components seems WRONG...no more True resurrections, Greater restorations, ext ext.... then...sorry if you died we banned all expensive material spells.

Context friend, you'd ban them from from the Archmage spell-like ability option. Though I'd favor allowing some "expensive" material components allowed for free (e.g. like Stoneskin). The price is a non-issue for cheaper stuff at that point.


Most of what you say makes sence altho I dont undetstand your reasoning for favored class option for prc pathfinder already has prc and they specificaly exclude favored class bonuses for them short of 3.5 simply has more prc

The game got bumped up so we are going have less 3.5 materials overall and aproved on a case by case basis so far they include : special materials, converted factorum class and a few related feats (font of insparation), and monkey grip feat (aproved only for a odd gish sorcerer)

IMHO, PF is too concerned about stopping people from doing much multi-classing and making PrCs less attractive. Hence I'd drop the PF rules on PrCs there if I was running a game.

With so few stuff from 3.5 by default I guess what stuff to ask about will only matter for a particular build. No ToB or the PF equivalent?

[Psyren]

Hence I'd drop the PF rules on PrCs there if I was running a game.

What rules would those be? PF PrCs work just like 3.5 ones - there's just less of them (because archetypes) and they're less attractive (because base classes have actual class features now.)

[Bigbeefie]

Social skills would not be amiss. You're the one that brought up out-of-combat stuff as better in PF....and yet it isn't.


The fighter's class skills are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (engineering) (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).


You also get 2 traits per character that can add just about ANY skill to your class skill.

But I see Intimidate as a social skill. You can trait in any other social skill you want...diplomacy, bluff, sense motive...you can also trait in things like UMD.

I believe sir your wrong on the aspect of not being able to do more then fight.

Tho I am also under the understanding alot of people "tried" pathfinder back when it was new and was trying to use the conversions over the now streamlined PF rule set. I remember trying to convert some APs from 3.5 to the new pathfinder stuff only ending up confused and things seeming off and weak... I also understand Pathfinder now as it stands and honestly its only getting better with each book and each Errata fixes they make...there are tons of erratas not covered in the book but on Piazo's website. If you happened to be one of those types of players then try Pathfinder again now it has APs that require 0 conversions.



IMHO, PF is too concerned about stopping people from doing much multi-classing and making PrCs less attractive. Hence I'd drop the PF rules on PrCs there if I was running a game.

With so few stuff from 3.5 by default I guess what stuff to ask about will only matter for a particular build. No ToB or the PF equivalent?

{{scrubbed}}

PF kept the Iconic PrC but cant copy from Wizards of the coast because of major Copy right laws....DO you blame Piazo for not wanting to loose Millions in a lawsuit just to make you happy by providing you with a dread necromancer? There are some things they can not do being a different company completely.

[Drachasor]

What rules would those be? PF PrCs work just like 3.5 ones - there's just less of them (because archetypes) and they're less attractive (because base classes have actual class features now.)

Favored class bonuses is what we were talking about. I don't see any reason PrCs shouldn't have them since you're already making a trade-off.


The fighter's class skills are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (engineering) (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str).

You also get 2 traits per character that can add just about ANY skill to your class skill.

But I see Intimidate as a social skill. You can trait in any other social skill you want...diplomacy, bluff, sense motive...you can also trait in things like UMD.

I believe sir your wrong on the aspect of not being able to do more then fight.

They can't do it well and have to make notable trade-offs which most other classes don't have to do. Part of it is the fact Fighters get only 2 skill points per level, and Intelligence can easily be a dump stat. To say nothing of the fact Charisma does nothing for them, so you're not going to have good intelligence and charisma. Fighters are just a horrible choice if you want to do much besides combat, and that's a shame. They should have more options as far as that goes and such options should be part of the base class not something you have to jump through hoops to get.

And I find it amusing your arguments have been:
1. Classes have more options
2. Fighters shouldn't have more options like tumbling or social skills
3. Of course fighters can do social stuff, I disagree with you!

I feel like I'm an intermediary in your arguments with yourself.

[Bigbeefie]

{{scrubbed}}

[Psyren]

Favored class bonuses is what we were talking about. I don't see any reason PrCs shouldn't have them since you're already making a trade-off.

Then you're adding a rule, not dropping one. PrCs couldn't be favored classes in 3.5 either.

A few extra HP or skill points won't make much of a difference anyway.

[Drachasor]

{{scrubbed}}

Yes, thinking a Fighter needs a better skill list and 4 skill points per level as a starting point at least means I want them to have 9th level spells.

Magically this also means you've had a consistent opinion. Oh wait, it doesn't.


Because traits are Jumping through Hoops when you get 2 for free, can feat more, and can feat to do it better when you already get Tons of feats....Yeah I say jumping through flaming hoops....*more sarcasm*

Traits are an optional rule in case you didn't notice. And having to pick traits to avoid being 1 dimensional indicates how the Fighter is poorly designed. It also limits RP options since you need to pick particular traits. Again, its all an optional rule, so there's no guarantee traits will even be available.


Then you're adding a rule, not dropping one. PrCs couldn't be favored classes in 3.5 either.

A few extra HP or skill points won't make much of a difference anyway.

Within the context of 3.5, they were essentially favored classes since they didn't have an experience penalty.

[Psyren]

Within the context of 3.5, they were essentially favored classes since they didn't have an experience penalty.

As I said, the handful of HP/SP you get out of making them "favored" is pretty minor so go nuts. The bigger concerns however are things that aren't advanced by most PrCs like Ki Pool, Arcane Pool, Alchemist Discoveries, Witch Hexes, Bloodline powers etc.

[eggynack]

They can't do it well and have to make notable trade-offs which most other classes don't have to do. Part of it is the fact Fighters get only 2 skill points per level, and Intelligence can easily be a dump stat. To say nothing of the fact Charisma does nothing for them, so you're not going to have good intelligence and charisma. Fighters are just a horrible choice if you want to do much besides combat, and that's a shame. They should have more options as far as that goes and such options should be part of the base class not something you have to jump through hoops to get.
Actually, while PF fighters may or may not be good at intimidation, 3.5 fighters are undoubtedly better at it. Pick up zhentarim soldier substitution levels (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a) and you get skill focus (intimidation) at 3rd level, extended intimidation at 5th, and swift demoralization at 9th, along with bluff and diplomacy on the skill list (at those three levels at least), and you get all of that for absolutely nothing. All in all, it makes 3.5 fighters into one of the better intimidation based classes in the game, and that's actually a relevant thing when imperious command exists (Is there an imperious command in PF? I'm completely unsure). Fighters are occasionally pretty sweet in 3.5.

[Yomega]

I will take the PrC as a favored class into consideration honestly I cant see it breaking anything.
0.There is an exception to every rule these are the general
1.You can only have 1 favored class
2.Outside the Core and Base classes your only option would be 1 hp or 1 skill point
3.The group is 90% noob and me I have about 98.5% hunch that none of the other players will touch archtypes let alone PrC
4.Im probably house ruling in some kind of bonus to HP and skills just because I can (Im finding humor here since Im technically a player and I can say "BEHOLD the powers that be say everyone has more HP")

Odd group dynamics its not like HP realy has a substantial effect in the long run if I want you dead you will die if I want you to kill it you will :biggrin:

Final note all systems have characters of different power lvls the focus on the various fighters seems like a pet peeve of a far few of you but entirely unrelated to mixing stystem

[Talderas]

{{scrubbed}}

Nice strawman you've built.

This has nothing to do with being able to do everything. It has everything to do with being able to do more than just "beat stuff with a stick". It's the ability for the fighter to have a meaningful contribution in something other than combat. That was the flaw that fighters had in 3.5 and Pathfinder didn't do anything to fix that. Ooo. Fighters get an auto-crit ability. Woop de doo. At level 20 they might be comparable to a dungeoncrasher fighter in 3.5 which was still a sad state of affairs.

[peacenlove]

The expected optimization or rather character ability in pathfinder is greater than in 3.5 what with the streamlined creation of monsters, which are often more difficult than their 3.5 brethren.
So what's essential in 3.5 might or might not be in PF, and what's bad becomes worse.

[Jokunen]

As a 3.5 player who has tried Pathfinder and resolved never to touch the stuff, I will say that there are plenty of 3.5 classes that are difficult or impossible to replicate using Pathfinder, especially if you also want a basic degree of competence. Furthermore Pathfinder has systematically destroyed any possibilities of any of the mundane classes achieving any reasonable degree of competence or any effective tools apart from "hit the opponent and try not to die", so the players who "cry like little bitchs" are probably sad at the idea of being restricted to either playing a caster or Joe McMeatShield.

Btw, what classes are you referring to?


Anyways, I agree that 4 skills points would do good to the Fighter, and more spells probably should have been nerfed. Also, I agree with others that baseline power level is higher in Pathfinder, but optimization cap is at lower level.

[Hurnn]

The class name is fighter....You fight things....you want him to be able to cast spells? How about lie, cheat, steal, and tumble his way to victory?

The falling behind damage I still don't see it I can take a Level 20 fighter in PF with just combat feats (no maneuvers) and the 2 Handed fighter archetype and basically Auto Critical a scythe for x5 multiplier usually resulting in slightly over 300 Damage, your stunned and blinded after the damage...if you play massive damage rules they die, and most stuff wont survive that much damage...if they somehow survive they are blinded and stunned, all off the first charging hit...Just to be done again round after round on a stunned and blinded target.


Um wow just wow. OK being 3.5 I can make my self immune to crits easy enough. I can have a fighter build that will make sure you never actually get near me with your charge. I can have a charge build that will go before you and bury you under my insane charging damage, 300??? try 1500+ on for size.

[DarkSonic1337]

imo nobody should get less than 4+int skill points in general.

Yeah it buffs spellcasters a little...but for them it's a buff that really doesn't change what they can do much. "OMG they can make a skill check without magical assistance! And they don't have to bypass it with some other magical method!" <_<

For mundanes it actually allows them to participate at all in such a situation.

[Yomega]

I am almost wanting to make a thread "Why do Fighters SUCK" it might be the fastest growing thread on the forum hahah :smallbiggrin:

[Jokunen]

imo nobody should get less than 4+int skill points in general.

Yeah it buffs spellcasters a little...but for them it's a buff that really doesn't change what they can do much. "OMG they can make a skill check without magical assistance! And they don't have to bypass it with some other magical method!" <_<

For mundanes it actually allows them to participate at all in such a situation.

4+int skill points really isn't necessary for Wizards, but for other casters it would be nice, yes.

[CombatOwl]

My group is starting a PF game in the next little bit and the farther the discution goes the more and more material from 3.5 is being requested by various people.

I am not entirly DMing this one but I have considerably more experience so the new DM is turning to me alot for this one (I am running the prequil lvl 0 adventure then he takes over)

So far we have aproved all special materials and a slightly tweaked factorum class

But what would be noteable areas to keep a close watch on and the potential problems that could arise from alowing a large amount of 3.5 material into the game?

I will say from experience that it cranks up the game's power quite a lot. If you like that sort of game, fine. If you don't beware.

Paizo released a conversion guide that instructs you on how to bring 3.5e material into Pathfinder. http://paizo.com/products/btpy89m6?Pathfinder-Roleplaying-Game-Conversion-Guide

[Dalebert]

PF was adapted from 3.5 to fix a lot of things as has already been pointed out. Just keep that in mind. If they didn't include something from 3.5, they probably had a good reason. Certain feats combine with certain others to become exponentially more effective. Take those feats into PF and it's even worse because people get way more feats. At times they worded something loosely forgetting to take into account the loopholes it creates for rules lawyers. Sometimes loopholes emerged later with a new class or feat where they forgot how it would interact with a previous creation. Things like that.

[Urpriest]

I am almost wanting to make a thread "Why do Fighters SUCK" it might be the fastest growing thread on the forum hahah :smallbiggrin:

Fighter Fridays are about as common as Monkdays. :smalltongue:

Anyway, the biggest potential problem is having to houserule absolutely everything that overlaps, and potentially everything that just has a different design philosophy. After that, the second-biggest potential problem is choosing stupid houserules. :smallwink:

[Hurnn]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSonic1337 View Post
imo nobody should get less than 4+int skill points in general.

Yeah it buffs spellcasters a little...but for them it's a buff that really doesn't change what they can do much. "OMG they can make a skill check without magical assistance! And they don't have to bypass it with some other magical method!" <_<

For mundanes it actually allows them to participate at all in such a situation.


4+int skill points really isn't necessary for Wizards, but for other casters it would be nice, yes.

I think we are veering off topic here a bit but I think fighters should be at 6+int, with only 2 you are barely competent at your terrible class skills which are all physical activities. Everyone else being bumped to 4+int if they are at 2. Seriously a paladin or cleric with a low int wont even have enough Skill points to know about their own religion.