Just exactly how much power difference is there between 3.5 and PF?

[aleucard]

I want to quantify this so we can more effectively make use of both in our campaigns. To put it simply, take the various systems, both individually and as a whole, and compare them to see which one has higher power ceiling, floor, and average (the stuff that anybody interested in making stronger characters can see easily, but not necessarily combos unless if they are also painfully obvious to anyone with access to both). To put it another way, what would be the Tier Ranking of either system's classes in the other system's Ranking? Most 3.5 martials are going to be hosed, obviously, but there are some tricks available in 3.5 that aren't in PF, and once actual Magic gets involved the game changes entirely.

This should be interesting.

[Anlashok]

I think the easiest way to sum it up is that Pathfinder has a higher floor across the board and better baseline support for some of the historically worse playstyles, but ultimately has a lower ceiling for damn near every option

[bekeleven]

I think the easiest way to sum it up is that Pathfinder has a higher floor across the board and better baseline support for some of the historically worse playstyles, but ultimately has a lower ceiling for damn near every option

Add that the floor for melee lowered and I'll otherwise agree. All effective combat styles were nerfed, not just the ones that required any form of optimization, and the hugely increased number of trap options serves only to hurt new players.

[Extra Anchovies]

Add that the floor for melee lowered and I'll otherwise agree. All effective combat styles were nerfed, not just the ones that required any form of optimization, and the hugely increased number of trap options serves only to hurt new players.

Melee has a lower floor, yes, but PoW probably changed that. Archery got a lot better, though. What with Clustered Shots, Deadly Aim, and the Snap Shot chain. All three of those are pretty big power boosts.

Unarmed got stronger, IMO. A brawler or monk with Pummeling Charge or another good style feat can really lay on the damage, often enough to trigger death by massive damage.

[Blackhawk748]

Unarmed got stronger, IMO. A brawler or monk with Pummeling Charge or another good style feat can really lay on the damage, often enough to trigger death by massive damage.

The monk is no longer terrible, so that may give you an idea. Pretty much what has been said before, generally the floor is higher but the ceiling is lower, Druids are less of an Insta Win, Wizards generally want to grab a PrC quickly and now Sorcerers dont really care about Prestiging . Its kinda odd.

Personally i would say use the PrCs from 3.5 (unless their version in PF is better) and use the PF base classes as this will drastically increase options.

[Twilightwyrm]

Add that the floor for melee lowered and I'll otherwise agree. All effective combat styles were nerfed, not just the ones that required any form of optimization, and the hugely increased number of trap options serves only to hurt new players.

Perhaps I am missing something, but other than Two-Handed Weapon fighting, what other mundane fighting styles have been nerfed? I'll agree on the huge number of new "trap" styles, but I attribute that to a natural increase that accompanies any proliferation of new fighting styles.

[Psyren]

...and the hugely increased number of trap options serves only to hurt new players.

I would ask, where is this supposed influx of mentally/emotionally scarred new PF players filling psych wards around the world? Yeah, Sturgeon's Law applies to most spells/feats/etc. in PF as it does in most systems, but that just makes digging for the treasure all the more fun. And if you don't feel like digging, well, handbooks.

PF has the same ratio of chaff to wheat that 3.5 did.

[T.G. Oskar]

Perhaps I am missing something, but other than Two-Handed Weapon fighting, what other mundane fighting styles have been nerfed? I'll agree on the huge number of new "trap" styles, but I attribute that to a natural increase that accompanies any proliferation of new fighting styles.

Sword & Board was already bad, but here it's simply frustrating.

In 3.5, you could make a decent Sword & Boarder by mixing Imp. Shield Bash, Shield Specialization, Shield Ward and Agile Shield Fighting. With those four feats (of your total of 7-8), you could get your shield AC to any touch attack and all special attacks (bull rush, disarm, grapple, trip), and make a shield bash on a full attack with TWF penalties (as if your shield was a light weapon) without the need for Dexterity. With some other feats, you could throw your shield (Shield Sling) or charge and potentially daze (Shield Slam/Shield Charge), making it relatively decent, although quite feat-intensive and in the end somewhat disappointing.

Come PF, and...there's no equivalent for Agile Shield Fighting. To make extra attacks, you NEED Two-Weapon Fighting, which means getting high Dex. Suddenly, some classes (read: Paladin) are deprived, because you're inducing MAD (need high Dex to get the feat), and you STILL need Improved Shield Bash to...well, make a shield bash without losing your AC. The feat chain for Shields doesn't truly compare: you need Shield Master (IIRC) to get the effect of Agile Shield Fighting, but you need about 4 feats to do what you could with three (to explain: you need Imp. Shield Bash, TWF, Shield Slam and Shield Master, compared to Imp. Shield Bash, Shield Specialization and Agile Shield Fighter). Missile Shield is somewhat weaker than Block Arrow (the 3.5 version of it) because you're limited to 1 round, not to your number of attacks of opportunity. Saving Shield is sorta unique, but it consumes your immediate action to grant a very minor bonus to an adjacent ally, meaning you need to be pretty close and thus ripe for AoE spells or effects (of which neither Saving Shield nor Covering Defense protect); consider that, in 5e, people consider the Protection Fighting Style (which is similar in execution, but causes the target to roll twice and choose the worst result, which is by definition better than this option unless the target has a massive bonus to attack rolls), and you can judge how this works on a system that uses larger numbers.

There are some very nice feats for S&B, but they appear after many feats have been taken, and some aren't allowed to anyone save for the Fighter. Ray Shield is an example: you need Spellbreaker, which is a Fighter-only feat, but what it does is awesome (deflect rays and ranged touch attacks); Bashing Finish is the link after Shield Master on the feat chain, but if you're a crit-fisher, you can get multiple shield bashes. Their version of Shield Specialization is better, but if you know which one it is (Shield Focus; Shield Specialization is an insult to Sword & Boarders). Covering Defense provides some decent protection if you choose to go Total Defense, but...you don't get Active Shield Defense to make Total Defense more attractive.

Oh, and if you want Shield Ward (or Parrying Shield, for that matter), you NEED to get Path of War. Shield Bonus to touch AC is always good.

Counting just briefly, there's about 12-15 feats specific to Sword & Boarders, and only a few are truly worthwhile. To be a really good Sword & Boarder, you NEED to be a Fighter (with the Shield Fighter archetype) or a Brawler (with the Shield Champion archetype), since they get enough feats and benefits to make shield fighting worthwhile. Classes like Paladin/Antipaladin, Cavalier/Samurai or similar heavy armor classes (maybe save for the Warder, but as with the Shield Ward expy, they're 3rd party material) can't get the benefits those two classes gaiin, and sadly, they could use shields efficiently (Paladin gets Sacred Shield archetype, but YMMV: excellent tank, but has nearly no damage potential to compensate). So, judging from one edition to the other, S&B changed slightly for the worst, because you need almost the same amount of feats in PF to get what you could do in 3.5, and you still lose something.

Archery got a solid boost, though, which is a plus. Many classes have viable ranged archetypes, and ranged feats/magic items are pretty awesome (Greater Designating is one item I'd definitely backport into 3.5, if only because it makes any ranged combatant into a buffer). Unarmed Combat only got better because of Pummeling Style, because otherwise there was no big difference between the two; before that, you could say they were the same. It's notoriously harder to make a character that uses finessable weapons, because just about every odd weapon gets Dex to damage, but not the traditional weapons that do so (shortswords, rapier, etc.) Mounted Combat is another fighting style that gets some solid benefits, but they still haven't solved their quintessential problem (rider and mount can't fight inside dungeons while the rider is mounting), so it's mostly providing boosts while ignoring the elephant in the room.

Also: some special attacks/combat maneuvers got worse. Trip no longer grants free attacks, but consume your attacks of opportunity and thus can't be used to lock down an opponent reliably. Bull Rush requires the Greater Bull Rush feat to make the opponent provoke attacks of opportunity during movement. There is no incentive to use Disarm, to be honest. Drag and Reposition are traps, Steal is...well, bizarre, and the only worthwhile combat maneuver IMO is Dirty Trick, because it can definitely make a dent on the opponent.

That's what PF martial characters have to work with, compared to their 3.5 counterparts. So as long as you understand two key concepts (you STILL need system mastery and the illusion of more feat slots is a trap for martial characters), you can probably work something out from the system. I'd say this reflects a great deal of what happens with Pathfinder: you STILL need system mastery to make a working build (too many trap options, perhaps more than in 3.5) and the illusion of more options is a trap. However, once you get that, you can do something that works, and sometimes working better than in 3.5 (for a given definition of "better")

[nyjastul69]

My opinion is that PF raised the floor with it's increased feat progression.

[deuxhero]

The monk is no longer terrible, so that may give you an idea. Pretty much what has been said before, generally the floor is higher but the ceiling is lower, Druids are less of an Insta Win, Wizards generally want to grab a PrC quickly and now Sorcerers dont really care about Prestiging . Its kinda odd.



Monk is no longer terrible if you know what you are doing and archetype it heavily, but core is still bad.

Wizards would want to prc out... if there were good wizard prcs. There's a shortage of 10/10 progression prcs a single class wizard can enter in PF (not that they don't exist. Lore Master and Magaambyan Arcanist). Opposition school research is a pretty strong reason to stick around for 9 levels, especially as an elemental wizard.

[Sith_Happens]

Perhaps I am missing something, but other than Two-Handed Weapon fighting, what other mundane fighting styles have been nerfed?

Pick a combat maneuver. Any combat maneuver.

[Extra Anchovies]

Pick a combat maneuver. Any combat maneuver.

Yes indeed. No free attacks on trip = melee just lost the ability to provide battlefield control. Well, without flooding the battlefield with pets, that is. Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Inquisitor, Cavalier, Brawler, Bloodrager, and Hunter can all get animal companions through base class features, domains/bonds, and/or archetypes. Pathfinder is big on giving characters pets.

[Kudaku]

Yes indeed. No free attacks on trip = melee just lost the ability to provide battlefield control. Well, without flooding the battlefield with pets, that is. Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Inquisitor, Cavalier, Brawler, Bloodrager, and Hunter can all get animal companions through base class features, domains/bonds, and/or archetypes. Pathfinder is big on giving characters pets.

Not sure if you're aware, but melee did not lose free attacks on trip - on the contrary they got more attacks. Greater Trip (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/greater-trip-combat---final) means the target provokes AoOs from everyone (not just the tripper) and Vicious Stomp (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/vicious-stomp-combat) gives everyone another free attack if they have the feat. A well-coordinated trip can provoke a ridiculous amount of attacks.

As for the topic... I think the floor and the general level of power was raised for most classes (see Paladin), but the theoretical maximum power level was lowered significantly.

[Extra Anchovies]

Not sure if you're aware, but melee did not lose free attacks on trip - on the contrary they got more attacks. Greater Trip (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/greater-trip-combat---final) means the target provokes AoOs from everyone (not just the tripper) and Vicious Stomp (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/vicious-stomp-combat) gives everyone another free attack if they have the feat. A well-coordinated trip can provoke a ridiculous amount of attacks.

The issue is, they're attacks of opportunity. You're limited to three or four per round unless you're really pumping Dexterity. That means you can only really keep two enemies locked down, three if you're fine with only damaging 1/round. Meanwhile, in 3.5, Knock-Down + Improved Trip + Combat Reflexes lets you get 2 attacks + trip against essentially any foe in reach.

[Kudaku]

The issue is, they're attacks of opportunity. You're limited to three or four per round unless you're really pumping Dexterity. That means you can only really keep two enemies locked down, three if you're fine with only damaging 1/round. Meanwhile, in 3.5, Knock-Down + Improved Trip + Combat Reflexes lets you get 2 attacks + trip against essentially any foe in reach.

...Then pump dexterity? I'd rather have the guy I trip provoke three AoOs from everyone in reach.

Don't get me wrong, combat maneuvers definitely have problems in PF. However I think the real issue with tripping in PF is the CMD scaling, not the lack of feat support.

[emeraldstreak]

Monk is no longer terrible if you know what you are doing

It never was if you know what you are doing.

[Extra Anchovies]

...Then pump dexterity? I'd rather have the guy I trip provoke three AoOs from everyone in reach.

Don't get me wrong, combat maneuvers definitely have problems in PF. However I think the real issue with tripping in PF is the CMD scaling, not the lack of feat support.

Lots of AoOs is good, yes. But it's not nearly as effective against multiple enemies, because where there was (in 3.5) uncapped free attacks, there is now (in PF) capped AoOs.

However, you are correct: scaling CMD (not to mention a CMD that is usually higher than CMB due to getting Strength and Dexterity), rather than opposed checks, has severely weakened combat maneuvers. Often the enemies worth tripping are the ones with higher BAB, and thus are also the ones most resistant to tripping.

[nyjastul69]

Lots of AoOs is good, yes. But it's not nearly as effective against multiple enemies, because where there was (in 3.5) uncapped free attacks, there is now (in PF) capped AoOs

How are AoO uncapped in 3.5?

[Extra Anchovies]

How are AoO uncapped in 3.5?

They aren't. The free attacks I reference are the ones from Knock-Down and the ones from Improved Trip:

Whenever you deal 10 or more points of damage to your opponent in melee, you make a trip attack as a free action against the same target.
You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when you attempt to trip an opponent while you are unarmed. You also gain a +4 bonus on your Strength check to trip your opponent. If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt.Neither of those have uses/round limits. Pathfinder, by changing them to AoOs, gave them uses/round limits.

So in PF, you can trip characters 1/round per 5 BAB (rounded up), and then get free attacks against them equal to your Dexterity modifier divided as you choose. However, you're going to want to save at least one or two of those AoOs for when enemies try to stand up.

In 3.5, you can attack a character, get a free trip attempt, and then get another attack against them, you can do that 1/round per 5 BAB (rounded up), and you haven't used any of your AoOs, which can then be reserved for repeating the attack -> trip -> attack combo against anyone who tries to stand up.

[nyjastul69]

They aren't. The free attacks I reference are the ones from Knock-Down and the ones from Improved Trip:
Neither of those have uses/round limits. Pathfinder, by changing them to AoOs, gave them uses/round limits.

So in PF, you can trip characters 1/round per 5 BAB (rounded up), and then get free attacks against them equal to your Dexterity modifier divided as you choose. However, you're going to want to save at least one or two of those AoOs for when enemies try to stand up.

In 3.5, you can attack a character, get a free trip attempt, and then get another attack against them, you can do that 1/round per 5 BAB (rounded up), and you haven't used any of your AoOs, which can then be reserved for repeating the attack -> trip -> attack combo against anyone who tries to stand up.

Gotcha, my bad. It seemed to me like you were uncapping AoO's in 3.5. Upon a reread, that's not the case.

[Curmudgeon]

It never was if you know what you are doing.
No, it's still bad even then. You can make a Monk into a good melee damage dealer. You can't make it into a good melee combatant. That is, the way you make the Monk a good melee damage dealer makes it vulnerable in melee combat because its AC is low, as is its resistance to trip attacks, bull rushes, and grappling. 3/4 BAB and MAD means you won't be able to make any of those defensive attributes good without creating a weakness elsewhere.

[Terazul]

My opinion is that PF raised the floor with it's increased feat progression.
The problem with this is that while it's technically true, in practice, it really isn't. If anything they pounded the floor with a jackhammer to make it more of a ditch.

3.5: 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18
3.P: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19

Early on, up until level 9 you're exactly the same, and then at 9 proper only 1 Feat ahead. When you finally hit 15 you're 2 ahead, and only at 19 are you 3 ahead. So yeah, you do, by the numbers get more feats. Problem is, most worthwhile martial feats/combos have been split into two or more (or removed outright). As T.G. Oskar points out in the post above yours, instead of just needing Power Attack and Improved Bullrush, you now need Power Attack, Improved Bullrush, and Greater Bull Rush to get the same effect. Then on top of that Greater Bull Rush requires BAB+6 so without bonus feats, you can't even do it until level 7 in PF something you could accomplish at 1 in 3.5. Trip similarly so, in that you need Improved/Greater Trip to get the bonus attack, but as he points out, it's not extra, it uses up your attack of opportunity. So if you wanted to get off multiple attacks you'd also need Combat Reflexes. It just goes on, and on.

Basically it's just as T.G. Oskar put it; There is an illusion of more options in Pathfinder. "Hey you get more feats!", but all the feats you were used to taking have been split into multiple parts, and made weaker on top of that, and the bonus in your progression doesn't actually make that much of a difference at the levels that usually see play. Add in there are a bunch of feats that are just flat out bad/trap options (I'm looking at you, Elephant Stomp), and it gets even worse.

Of course, ignore all of this if we're talking about spellcasting feats.

[sideswipe]

pathfinder is the game of "add 2 to everything in 3.5 and slap a new name on it".

[Extra Anchovies]

Of course, ignore all of this if we're talking about spellcasting feats.

Oh, yes. Metamagic looks weaker, because there are fewer reducers and Persistent Spell is no longer king, but it's just as powerful IMO. The new Persistent Spell is basically Repeat Spell for any save-or-lose, and Echoing Spell is Twin for everything else. Then there's Dazing Spell, which is awesome. And, with Sacred Geometry, you can get all of that for free. Take SG three times, once for Quicken/Dazing and once for Echoing/Persistent, invest 14 ranks into Knowledge (Engineering) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?363930-Sacred-Geometry-and-Arithmancy&p=17879295&viewfull=1#post17879295), and BAM all of your cantrips are Quickened, Dazing, and Persistent. Then, since you've cast your quickened spell, turn around and cast an Echoing, Dazing, Persistent cantrip with your standard action. You can do this all day.

ETA: I highly recommend reading the entire thread I linked, especially if you enjoy math. Too bad it was necro'd (only 11 days past the 45-day threshold, too) and locked.