What are the biggest rule changes going from 3.5 ---> Pathfinder?

[Scorponok]

And for those who have switched over, how has the experience been?

Been thinking of using Pathfinder rules in my next campaign. A lot of players seem to have good things to say about it. Though I plan to read the whole Pathfinder PHB eventually, what are the parts I should concentrate on to get up to speed and start a Pathfinder campaign?

[BWR]

I foresee yet another PF vs. 3.5 bitchfest.
If you search a bit you should find several threads detailing the differences and likes/dislikes.
The best thing to do is just read the rulebook. The good thing is that since the editions are so similar, you can usually use old 3.5 rules without noticing the difference. There are enough changes that you should check up on every rule to see if they work the same, if you want to run pure PF rules. There are changes to all sorts of things like how disease and poison work, polymorphing, several feats like Power Attack and Cleave, lots of spells, etc.

I'd start with seeing how the classes have changed, then look at skills, feats and Combat Maneuvers.

[Honest Tiefling]

I'd seriously consider back porting some 3.5 stuff. Even if you think that Pathfinder is a glistening, glorious, thing, perfection incarnate...You have to admit that the strength of either system are the choices. It might also help smooth things over if some people aren't on board with the idea yet.

[Palanan]

Here is Saph's overview of the changes (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?136890-The-3-5-Pathfinder-Handbook) from several years ago. Probably there have been a lot of details tweaked around since then, but this should be a good place to start.

[jaydubs]

Some changes that people notice immediately:
-Changes to skills. Simplified, condensed, class skills just give +3 instead of cross class costing twice as much and being limited to half.
-Feats every odd level.
-Hit dice: d4 -> d6, d6 -> d8.
-Many classes have been modified.
-Single class is usually preferable to multiclassing now.
-Archetypes.
-Many spells were toned down. Many (not all) save or suck spells now allow a save every round. Polymorph toned down.
-Multiclass penalty replaced by favored class bonus.
-Combat maneuver rules replaced specific rules for grapple, trip, bull rush, etc.

Class specific (doesn't list nearly everything, just stuff coming to mind):
-Sneak attack works on more things now. Rogues have rogue tricks.
-Bards can cast spells while performing.
-Wild shape is more limited, can't dump physical stats anymore (part of the general change to polymorph type effects). Choose between animal companion and a domain spell.
-Turn undead got replaced by channel energy (area healing).
-Paladins has a lot more run off of charisma, and are generally improved.
-Wizard opposition schools just take up two slots now.

[OldTrees1]

The biggest rule change for me was all the tiny infrequent rules they changed that had no reason to be changed. As a result I went from a system that I knew I knew to a system that I did not know I did not know even after reading the rules.

[Snowbluff]

As above. PF's frequent FAQ rulings makes the game hard to keep up with.

Here is Saph's overview of the changes (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?136890-The-3-5-Pathfinder-Handbook) from several years ago. Probably there have been a lot of details tweaked around since then, but this should be a good place to start.

This pretty much.

Personally, if you're a big 3.5 grognard like me, the question goes from "I have too many odd character designs" in 3.5 to "I have too few meaningful options" in PF. Not that PF lacks options, it just feels like a lot of is just filler with 4e style "either take the obviously crappy option or the obviously good option." 3.5 was more insidious, which is something I appreciated.

[BWR]

I would recommend to retain some elements of 3.5. For example pathfinder alone it is very hard to build a decent 9th level spellcasting gish.

Do you mean a 9th level character or one capable of casting 9th level spells?
If the former, no. If the latter, that is intentional.

[Psyren]

It's not hard to gish at all. EK, Sorc/DD 8, Druid 20, Cleric 20 and Oracle 20 all work out of the box, and AA was fixed. Wizard 20, Shaman 20 and Witch 20 are more difficult to do, but still doable. Arcanist can easily do it as well, particularly with archetypes like Blade Adept. And the upcoming Psychic will likely be another easy 9th-level spells gish, especially since they don't have spell failure to worry about.

Blood Money is from a specific adventure path so it only exists baseline if the DM allows it, which in my opinion they shouldn't.

[Faily]

No functioning gish? The Magus would like a word with you...

In general, I prefer the Magus to the 3.5 Duskblade, mostly because of the nice selection of tricks and toys for them. Duskblade as a whole had very little support in 3.5.

[Snowbluff]

Duskblade as a whole had very little support in 3.5.

I disagree. The entire system had a huge number of options for full BAB classes, and well as a multitude of ways of expanding the class spells. Additionally, full channeling was a Full Attack Action, presenting unique opportunities for expansion and interaction such as Shadow Pouncing. Heck, you can recursively shadow pounce with DB. Not to mention feats that are so synergistic to the class that we rarely deviate from a very powerful build. Arcane Strike is absurdly strong with a DB.

[Faily]

I just don't agree with that view, but different opinions are cool. I just felt that whatever Duskblade did, a Jade Phoenix Mage or Abjurant Champion did better, and Duskblade had few if any options for prestige classes. Arcane Strike is very good for Duskblades, I agree, but it is even better for Jade Phoenix Mage since it can be combined with Arcane Wrath (one is a Free Action, the other is a Swift Action).

The Magus, while not a full BAB gish, have a better spell selection, and with a good selection of Magus Arcana can keep going for a long time while having a good flexibility (recall spells, bring in spells you didn't prepare but have in your spell book, add Int-modifier to attack rolls, channel on full attacks, cast spell and full attack, etc).

[ArqArturo]

I'd seriously consider back porting some 3.5 stuff. Even if you think that Pathfinder is a glistening, glorious, thing, perfection incarnate...You have to admit that the strength of either system are the choices. It might also help smooth things over if some people aren't on board with the idea yet.

The PF Paladin + Fist of Raziel turns into a monster.

[Snowbluff]

I just don't agree with that view, but different opinions are cool.

This is about Magus vs. DB, or even DB versus other 3.5 classes. It's more about you being factually incorrect. There is no denying the huge variety of option the DB's chassis and class features affords. Have you tried building a 3.5 DB? :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

One of the problems I have with Duskblade is that it really only goes off at 13th-level. The magus meanwhile has been full-attacking with magic since level 1, and has a much more versatile list. Then you throw in all the archetype flavors like Hexcrafter or Black Blade or Eldritch Scion or Kensai and there are a lot of concepts there.

This is not to say that Duskblade is bad - far from it - but I can also understand why people might prefer Magus despite the worse BAB.

[Snowbluff]

You are so off topic from the off topic rant and I find that offensive.

You should remember which system 3.5 was, and then start to think of the DB in those terms. It's not that DB falls off at 13, it's that your let free of the cage that is predetermined class progression. Be free, my child! Wallow in hate as an Ur Priest! Make an obscene number of full attack actions by channeling D Hop onto yourself! Become Teleportron! Learn new spells as whatever that PrC is I really don't care! Level as an Abjurant Champion because you thought you liked more BAB with your BAB! Or stop at three, and go into Arcane Archer and Divine Crusader and shoot Fimbulwinter at people because you can! Or do likewise, but built it into a gish as your martial component, capable of channeling your touch spells!

EDIT: Personally, I wish you got Full Channeling before 13 so I can cram more crap at the end of my DB builds. :smalltongue:

[Psyren]

Well, I was talking more about where you start than were you stop. I just don't feel as much like a gish-in-a-can until 13, and if I PrC before then I delay the cast + full-attack even further.

And the PrCs feel like the star of the show in 3.5, not the base classes. If I become an Ur-Priest, the road I took to get there doesn't feel like it matters much.

[Snowbluff]

And the PrCs feel like the star of the show in 3.5, not the base classes. If I become an Ur-Priest, the road I took to get there doesn't feel like it matters much.

It certainly does matter and you know it. Full Channel Harm, or some other nasty SoL or SoD if you're particular insidious or was clever in your build. As an example, this is different from how an Ur Priest would be used in a RKV build or a Duskblade in a Shadow Pounce build. PrCs and Classes are really no different from each other; the important part is that you construct of system of synergies in between them in your build.

IMHO, low levels suck in terms of building either way. Neither DB or Magus really do anything to solve that for me.

[georgie_leech]

This one is less of a rule than a design shift, but in Pathfinder, FAQ's can explicitly change how the rules work. Contrast 3.5, where they were just of dubious accuracy.

[The Random NPC]

The biggest rule change for me was all the tiny infrequent rules they changed that had no reason to be changed. As a result I went from a system that I knew I knew to a system that I did not know I did not know even after reading the rules.

Basically this, the tiny changes trip me up more that the big ones. I also don't like the "unwritten rules" that sometimes pop up.