Pathfinder question

[herrhauptmann]

So the last few 3.5 characters I've played have been warriors.
A nearby group is just getting started playing Pathfinder. Now, I've been unable to find Pathfinder books for sale, or for torrenting, and I've been ignoring the 3.5 vs PF arguments which crop on the board, because until now, I didn't know anyone playing PF.

Since it looks like I'm not going to have much time to prep a character, which PF class is changed the least compared to 3.5?


Thanks

[Mongoose87]

Fighter, I'd say. The only real differences are a couples +s here and there.

[Tinydwarfman]

They're all pretty much the same except for the paladin. They all got some minor, mostly inconsequential buffs. I actually wouldn't recommend fighter, because many of the feats are different. Rogue and barbarian both got a few minor talents/rage powers, but are 95% the same. Rogue just sneak attacks everything.

[herrhauptmann]

Do chain wielding maniacs work about the same as in 3.5? If the party's large enough, I'll build a CWM as the backup fighter, minor terrain controller, flank giver.

[Tinydwarfman]

Do chain wielding maniacs work about the same as in 3.5? If the party's large enough, I'll build a CWM as the backup fighter, minor terrain controller, flank giver.

Spiked chain is nerfed to hell. One of the designers (can't remember which one) actually posted in response saying that it was because "exotic weapons shouldn't be more powerful" or some ridiculous ******** like that.

[herrhauptmann]

Spiked chain is nerfed to hell. One of the designers (can't remember which one) actually posted in response saying that it was because "exotic weapons shouldn't be more powerful" or some ridiculous ******** like that.

WHAT? BUTT MONKEYS!
How was it nerfed? Less damage, no threatening reach?
Is there something else I can wield to create the same effect?

[tyckspoon]

Do chain wielding maniacs work about the same as in 3.5? If the party's large enough, I'll build a CWM as the backup fighter, minor terrain controller, flank giver.

They made it a non-reach weapon. It's still a tripping+disarming weapon, but it's not really worth taking the feat for it now in comparison to just using a glaive + armor spikes/spiked gauntlet combo.

[arguskos]

Why has no one linked this man to the Pathfinder SRD yet? Really, ya'll should be ashamed.

[Starbuck_II]

WHAT? BUTT MONKEYS!
How was it nerfed? Less damage, no threatening reach?
Is there something else I can wield to create the same effect?

Basically, Spiked Chains are a Heavy Flail with exotic proficiency (seriously no difference).

[EvilBloodGnome]

Why has no one linked this man to the Pathfinder SRD yet? Really, ya'll should be ashamed.

+1

And about the spiked chain. Yeah, that's a shame, but you can use the old reach ones if you'd like. The rules are merely a suggestion at the best. God knows I've used the old ones a few times now in games.

And if your DM is solid on it, there's the bladed scarf from Curse of the Crimson Throne. It's a spiked chain that only deals 1d6 damage, has a 19-20/x2 range, reach, and doesn't disarm. Lets ya deal 1d4 damage to anyone that grapples you, though.

But the thing with Pathfinder is that you can supplement 3.5 rules if you don't like the changes so long as your DM agrees. Like if you dislike how they changed Power Attack or anything, just ask to use the old one.

[herrhauptmann]

Why has no one linked this man to the Pathfinder SRD yet? Really, ya'll should be ashamed.

Awesome, I didn't even know there was a SRD for pathfinder.

[BobVosh]

SRD for pathfinder on the developer's site

Ya, spiked chain is exactly heavy flail. Except it is 2D4 instead of 1D10, doesn't have a threat range, and takes a feat. So literally worse in every way, except minimum damage and bell curve.

Fighter is the least changed, paladin is the best buffed. Few changes on it, other than smite, lay on hands, and special mount.(all changed for the better)

[EvilBloodGnome]

Sorcerers and paladins both got the biggest juice in 'em. Monks are more useful, rangers are also better and get medium armor. Clerics got more powerful domains but lost heavy armor. Bards I think were improved and druids, while still beastly (no pun intended) were nerfed.

But yeah, the least changed was the fighter, but they got a facelift, too. Weapon training and armor training to lay on top of their feat progression.

[BobVosh]

Rangers always had medium armor. They just lost most class features if they indulged in it.

[EvilBloodGnome]

Weapon and Armor Proficiency
A ranger is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, and with light armor and shields (except tower shields).

Sadly not the case. Now you can use breastplates now, though.

Sadly no Mithral Full Plates, though. Even with Heavy Armor Prof. you lose your combat styles.

[Person_Man]

Basically, Spiked Chains are a Heavy Flail with exotic proficiency (seriously no difference).

Since Pathfinder is theoretically backwards compatible with all 3.5 products, you can use the Drow Scorpion Chain (Secrets of Xen'drik pg 137). It's exactly the same as a normal 3.5 Spiked Chain, except that if you happen to be a drow, you can take the Drow Skirmisher feat (which grants several proficiencies and minor bonuses) instead of Exotic Weapon Proficiency to get proficiency with it.

There are similar back-door fixes for most other things that Pathfinder nerfed (Power Attack, Expansion, more spells, etc). Essentially Pathfinder just screws melee builds who don't have access to splat books.

[9mm]

Sorcerers and paladins both got the biggest juice in 'em. Monks are more useful, rangers are also better and get medium armor. Clerics got more powerful domains but lost heavy armor. Bards I think were improved and druids, while still beastly (no pun intended) were nerfed.

But yeah, the least changed was the fighter, but they got a facelift, too. Weapon training and armor training to lay on top of their feat progression.

bards work differnet now; with a horribly mutilated bardic music, but boosted spellcasting; but overall alot of people feel that overall they're a bit weaker.

[herrhauptmann]

Since Pathfinder is theoretically backwards compatible with all 3.5 products, you can use the Drow Scorpion Chain (Secrets of Xen'drik pg 137). It's exactly the same as a normal 3.5 Spiked Chain, except that if you happen to be a drow, you can take the Drow Skirmisher feat (which grants several proficiencies and minor bonuses) instead of Exotic Weapon Proficiency to get proficiency with it.

There are similar back-door fixes for most other things that Pathfinder nerfed (Power Attack, Expansion, more spells, etc). Essentially Pathfinder just screws melee builds who don't have access to splat books.

Given the DM specified pathfinder (I know it's supposed to be backwards compatible), I don't think he's going to let me cherrypick 3.5 things I want.

[Window459]

Sadly not the case. Now you can use breastplates now, though.

Sadly no Mithral Full Plates, though. Even with Heavy Armor Prof. you lose your combat styles.

Isn't Mithral Fullplate medium armor thus useable?

[Akal Saris]

As already mentioned, the bladed scarf has the spiked chain's powers of 10ft reach, usable up close and at reach, and can trip. It's in Curse of the Crimson Throne and in the Pathfinder RPG book, so odds are it will be allowed. No backwards compatibility necessary.

That said, I'd only recommend the tripper build if the party has a lot of melees. If I recall, the extra attack you get from tripping now counts as another AOO (so combat reflexes is a must), BUT the whole party gets an AOO as well when you trigger it. So it's potentially a lot better, but only if you set up the fight right.

I'd agree that fighters changed the least overall though.

[EvilBloodGnome]

Isn't Mithral Fullplate medium armor thus useable?

I seem to remember you needing Armor Prof: Heavy to use it even thout it's speeded as Mithral, but now my mind's fuzzy on it.

[herrhauptmann]

Sadly not the case. Now you can use breastplates now, though.

Sadly no Mithral Full Plates, though. Even with Heavy Armor Prof. you lose your combat styles.

So when armor affects combat styles, it is based off shape of the armor (full plate, breastplate etc), and not the overall weight (mithral bp is light weight, mithral fullplate is medium weight)?

[Paul H]

Hi

IIRC you still have to be proficient with the armour, but the 'nett' class is what affects spelcasting, styles, etc.

Eg. Bards suffer no ASF for casting spells in a Mithril Breastplate, but he still needs to take Med Armour prof.

Don't forget that Fighters get new abilities, lesser armour check abilities, weapon group bonuses.

Some PF games use Traits from campaign sources - I suggest you look into those as well.

Thanks
Paul H

[EvilBloodGnome]

The traits can be useful, indeed. There's one that allows you to reduce ACP by 1 which can be helpful at the least.

[Paul H]

Hi

Don't forget Anaotomist that grants +1 melee damage. Duelist (Taldor) that grants +1 AC when alone in melee. Another grants +1hit/damage fighting targets of Lge/larger size.

Plenty others out there.

Cheers
Paul H

[Roderick_BR]

Why has no one linked this man to the Pathfinder SRD yet? Really, ya'll should be ashamed.

WAY better than that clunsy PDF that is slow as heck to flip through.

[EpicEvokerElf]

Unless this has changed from 3.5, making an armor out of mithril changes what kind of armor it is. Your full plate is medium armor, and thus you may wear it with the medium armor proficiency feat.

[JGoldenberg]

Unless this has changed from 3.5, making an armor out of mithril changes what kind of armor it is. Your full plate is medium armor, and thus you may wear it with the medium armor proficiency feat.

You're still required to be proficient, but it does behave as one step lighter.
Which makes more sense realistically, Heavy Armour Proficiency would mean you know how to put on, and maneuver in Heavy Armour, why should the fact it's mithril or not give you instaknowledge when you're only familiar with medium armour?

[Eldariel]

You're still required to be proficient, but it does behave as one step lighter.
Which makes more sense realistically, Heavy Armour Proficiency would mean you know how to put on, and maneuver in Heavy Armour, why should the fact it's mithril or not give you instaknowledge when you're only familiar with medium armour?

This was changed in Pathfinder. In 3.5, it's medium and you only need MAP. In PF, it's medium for other purposes but you need HAP.

[EvilBloodGnome]

That's what I figured. Full Mithral Plate is one of the nerfs I can agree with, it was total cheese. Spiked chain not so much though >.>