Just a few concerns...

[MirthTheBard]

I love D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder and so do my friends, we didn't mind 4e too much but definitely liked the former more.

How does 5e/Next compare? It seems very simplified in some regards from what I've seen.

Also, we tend to play more combat heavy level 1 starting campaigns, would there be anything to look out for in these early levels as far as disparities or easy exploits? Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated playground!

[mephnick]

I love D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder and so do my friends, we didn't mind 4e too much but definitely liked the former more.

How does 5e/Next compare? It seems very simplified in some regards from what I've seen.

Also, we tend to play more combat heavy level 1 starting campaigns, would there be anything to look out for in these early levels as far as disparities or easy exploits? Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated playground!

God, can someone please put a "Differences between 3.5 and 5e" sticky up?

Not to randomly jump on you, you're just the latest, but I feel like half of the 5e forum is "What's the difference between 3.5 and 5e?"

or "convince me to switch to 5e!"

There are tons of pages on this site and tons of articles on the internet explaining the differences.

Of course, this won't stop someone from posting a "Convince me!" thread every few days and I'm just coming off as an *******, like usual.

[Socko525]

God, can someone please put a "Differences between 3.5 and 5e" sticky up?

^^ This, I've thought this a lot myself

[Theodoxus]

The chassis for 5th is heaps better than 3.P - it natively does what Pathfinder is finally doing with feats (slashing grace, for instance). Removing move actions just makes sense - essentially giving you spring attack for free (well, spring attack on steroids, actually). No more ACP means arcanists can run around in full plate and cast fireballs (provided they get the heavy armor proficiency) and multiclassing (optional!) rules make that less advantageous than it would be in 3.P

Low level combat is comparable. 5th keeps the 1st level HPs and Con mods of Pathfinder (so sorcs and wizards get the d6 HD) Without BAB (or, with a +2 BAB equivalent), everyone from the fighter to the wizard and all in between are competent at 1st level. Paradoxically, they get worse as they level, as proficiency isn't a 1:1 ratio - but given bounded accuracy, ACs aren't on a 1:1 ratio either. I've found that because of this, combat can be fairly swingy. But there are more ways to mitigate it in 5th than in 3.P (and even being knocked out is much less deadly, unless the mob continues to wallop on the unconscious PC.)

It looks simpler on paper, but the simplicity is based on merging or eliminating cumbersome rules off the 3.P axis and realizing that having more freedom isn't OP - it's just more freedom. Feat taxes are all but gone (except for a few niche cases) so character building is pretty straight forward. You can make your character as specific or general as you like, and varying archetypes provide different levels of optimization without being too overly 'this is the only archetype to take, all others suck' (Ranger is debatable, and Fighter definitely has a question of why play this archetype - but Pathfinder has this as well, and a ton more options that can only be called traps).

Honestly, I'm going to be homebrewing a 5.P campaign using the rules chassis of 5th with the expanded class/settings of Pathfinder. Should be a fun experiment.

[MirthTheBard]

Low level combat is comparable. 5th keeps the 1st level HPs and Con mods of Pathfinder (so sorcs and wizards get the d6 HD) Without BAB (or, with a +2 BAB equivalent), everyone from the fighter to the wizard and all in between are competent at 1st level. Paradoxically, they get worse as they level, as proficiency isn't a 1:1 ratio - but given bounded accuracy, ACs aren't on a 1:1 ratio either. I've found that because of this, combat can be fairly swingy. But there are more ways to mitigate it in 5th than in 3.P (and even being knocked out is much less deadly, unless the mob continues to wallop on the unconscious PC.)

It looks simpler on paper, but the simplicity is based on merging or eliminating cumbersome rules off the 3.P axis and realizing that having more freedom isn't OP - it's just more freedom. Feat taxes are all but gone (except for a few niche cases) so character building is pretty straight forward. You can make your character as specific or general as you like, and varying archetypes provide different levels of optimization without being too overly 'this is the only archetype to take, all others suck' (Ranger is debatable, and Fighter definitely has a question of why play this archetype - but Pathfinder has this as well, and a ton more options that can only be called traps).


Thanks a lot Theodoxus! I really appreciate you reading my full post and not getting hung up on the comparison part and ranting about it :)

[MirthTheBard]

God, can someone please put a "Differences between 3.5 and 5e" sticky up?

Not to randomly jump on you, you're just the latest, but I feel like half of the 5e forum is "What's the difference between 3.5 and 5e?"

or "convince me to switch to 5e!"

There are tons of pages on this site and tons of articles on the internet explaining the differences.

Of course, this won't stop someone from posting a "Convince me!" thread every few days and I'm just coming off as an *******, like usual.

Good thing I included a more specific question regarding 1st level starting, heavy combat campaigns in order to justify the post as being somewhat unique, but you were probably too busy being mad that I included the generic "how does it compare" question beforehand. I can understand your frustration but at least consider the entire post as a whole before jumping to the conclusion of "ugh this has been posted before."

[MaxWilson]

RE: disparities at low levels, the biggest disparity I can think of is that variant humans at low levels have an extra feat, which can be incredibly good at those levels. (E.g. fighter with Heavy Armor Master, or Polearm Master.)

Also, Moon Druids are very powerful from roughly level 2 through 4, relative to other characters of similar level. After that they remain competitive but other classes catch up.

[HorridElemental]

5e so far has a **** ton of less flaming hoops to jump through.

Want to play a Eldritch Knight? In 3.5 you had to play a Duskblade (not a core class so buy a new book) or multiclass and take a prestige class (main two way). Duskblades are easy to make incompetent (friends did it... Haha) and the later makes you inferior to other classes a lot of your life.

Want to play an effective non-caster? Well you can trip lock or ubercharge in 3.P and takes more flaming hoops than just picking a class and going with it.

Group checks and jump rules get rid of a lot of the flaming hoops too :).

[rlc]

Good thing I included a more specific question regarding 1st level starting, heavy combat campaigns in order to justify the post as being somewhat unique, but you were probably too busy being mad that I included the generic "how does it compare" question beforehand. I can understand your frustration but at least consider the entire post as a whole before jumping to the conclusion of "ugh this has been posted before."

To be fair, it's not that unique.
But, on the plus side, it takes less time to make a character than it does to actually play one. This edition is also designed to level up faster at lower levels faster.