Results 1 to 30 of 389
Thread: Should I get Pathfinder?
-
2011-12-05, 09:32 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2011
- Location
- Plane of Elemental Pie
- Gender
Should I get Pathfinder?
What I'm asking here is whether or not there are enough differences between D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder to make it worth getting PF, or any other reason why I should (or shouldn't) get PF.
Awesome Pony-Chul by slayerx!
My computer is on the blink. Posting will be affected.
The endless wisdom that is my extended signature lies here.
I have Pokemon!
-
2011-12-05, 09:33 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- 570 PA
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
I too am curious about Pathfinder. Are classes that are yet to be remade in PF backward compatable, like 3e is to 3.5?
-
2011-12-05, 09:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Minnesota
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Last edited by Hiro Protagonest; 2011-12-05 at 09:34 PM.
Avatar of George the Dragon Slayer, from the upcoming Indivisible!
My Steam profile
Warriors and Wuxia, Callos_DeTerran's ToB setting
-
2011-12-05, 09:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
There's not quite that much difference between the two. Pathfinder is certainly an improvement in at least some respects, but if you've already got books for 3.5 I suggest you stick with 3.5. Incidentally, you can find pretty much everything published for Pathfinder at http://www.d20pfsrd.com/
3.5 classes are generally considered compatible with Pathfinder. Some things (class skills, HD and BAB correlation, etc) may need changing but game balance isn't really affected.
-
2011-12-05, 09:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
The books are really nice, but even then I use online resources when I am near a computer so I can do text searches and not have to dig through many hundreds of pages.
-
2011-12-05, 09:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
You can always mix the two, there really isn't much adjustment needed for most classes. Non-PF races and classes generally need to be adjusted upward.
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2011-12-05, 09:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2011
- Location
- Plane of Elemental Pie
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Can you pretty much play PF just using the SRD?
Awesome Pony-Chul by slayerx!
My computer is on the blink. Posting will be affected.
The endless wisdom that is my extended signature lies here.
I have Pokemon!
-
2011-12-05, 10:14 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2011-12-05, 10:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
I prefer using a PF basis and then backporting anything I need from 3.5. Ideally on top of that if there's a PF and a 3.5 thing with the same name (Power Attack comes to mind) I'd consider allowing both.
Originally Posted by The Giant
-
2011-12-05, 10:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
From a financial standpoint, if you bought the whole 3E library "starting over" with Pathfinder might see like a waste. However, it's not like you need the whole Pathfinder library.
You can get by with just the Core Rulebook, which is a PHB and DMG in one. There are significant changes to 3E stuff so that it feels like an update to the 3E system. You also get a sense of what to do to convert your 3E material. True, Pathfinder now has Magus and Oracle to use instead of Duskblade and Favored Soul. If you want to buy Advanced Players' Guide and Ultimate Magic, great, but if you don't and would prefer to stick with Duskblade and Favored Soul so as not to spend more money, you can tell what to do to adapt. Duskblade probably just needs an updated spell list. Favored Soul could be modeled after Pathfinder Sorcerer and have "soul lines". So as not to do much work, you can tag on a bloodline from Unearthed Arcana onto Favored Soul as class abilities and be done. To mirror Pathfinder Sorcerer more just come up with lists of bonus spells known depending on the bloodline.
If money isn't an issue, then Pathfinder is a good buy. It is an update to the 3E system and has continuing support. It has its fans and detractors; I'm a fan. It will never satisfy those who are enraged by 3E magic, but then nothing short of ending magic will do that (4E). Others take issue with changes in some combat feats. If upon reading them they also bother you, no harm is done to continue using the 3E version for those particular feats.
-
2011-12-05, 10:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Minnesota
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Avatar of George the Dragon Slayer, from the upcoming Indivisible!
My Steam profile
Warriors and Wuxia, Callos_DeTerran's ToB setting
-
2011-12-05, 11:06 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Pathfinder books are worth every cent if you can afford them. They have allot more content and cost a bit more than 3.5 books. The rules are more streamlined, everything is clarified, and your players will feel like they are getting more from their classes despite the fact that the monsters are still balanced to fight them.
-
2011-12-05, 11:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
This. Pathfinder is like a big patch for 3.5; doesn't change much, but has a lot of nice tweaks here and there. I like to say that Pathfinder is about 5-10% better than 3.5 (in my opinion); everyone gets a few more choices and a little more polish. Don't throw out your 3.5 material, just combine the two.
-
2011-12-05, 11:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
As other people have noted, Paizo posts their entire Core line in the PRD for free. This includes: Core Rules, Gamemastery Guide, Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, and both Bestiaries (soon to include Bestiary 3 and Advanced Race Guide).
Its their strategy to avoid internet piracy: give us everything for free so we literally have no reason to steal.
That said, the books are amazing quality and contain much more information (both fluff and crunch) than any comparable 3.5 volume. At the very least I'd suggest picking up a Core Rulebook.
Most of the non-core PF material is found on the OGC, which is updated by the fans.
-
2011-12-05, 11:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Minnesota
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
NO.
Pathfinder does not fix balance problems. Fighters still have to take out their backup ranged weapon when flyers come out. Tier 1 is still very much tier 1. Heck, the only real difference is a good boost to the core paladin, which is now a good tier 4, and a decent boost to the ranger, making them a high tier 4.
Also, more streamlined and clarified rules? The rules are just as hard to learn as 3.5 rules are. Clarified, maybe, but core 3.5 was about as clarified as well.Avatar of George the Dragon Slayer, from the upcoming Indivisible!
My Steam profile
Warriors and Wuxia, Callos_DeTerran's ToB setting
-
2011-12-05, 11:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
While I agree with you for the most part, I would argue that Pathfinder is actually more intuitive in some situations, namely favored class and multi-classing, negative levels, CMB/CMD, and skill list. They certainly didn't fix the system, but I use their rules as a basis to implement 3.5 material, rather than the other way around.
Prestige Bard, updated for Pathfinder.
Revamped Spell Resistance system, for use with Spell Points/Psionics.
-
2011-12-05, 11:35 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Um, how is a Fighter needing a ranged weapon for fliers a balance issue? Everyone has to do that. Even casters need to prepare ranged spells if they want to hit targets out of reach. Thats how its meant to work...
The class balance still isn't perfect, but it has been improved upon, even in the Fighter's case.
Also, more streamlined and clarified rules? The rules are just as hard to learn as 3.5 rules are. Clarified, maybe, but core 3.5 was about as clarified as well.Last edited by Real Sorceror; 2011-12-05 at 11:35 PM.
-
2011-12-05, 11:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- UTC -6
-
2011-12-05, 11:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Eh, if you compare PF only to 3.5 only, the balance is about the same. Wizards got some spell nerfs early on, but later it's basically the same list. The fighter's main mid-op tactics got nerfed, and their archetypes are nowhere near as good as 3.5's ACFs. Yes, that includes the one that lets you move and attack... at level 20.
The nice stuff comes in when you combine them. You get to taste the streamlining benefits - skills, combat maneuvers, no god damn 100 gp pearls and important spell slots just to figure out what your equipment might do if it's not especially cursed, agh. I hated that one. Hated DMs who banned artificer's monocle about as much. Where was I? Right, you get to have the little benefits and upgrades and keep the content in 3.5 that made things more interesting and fair for mundanes.Originally Posted by The Giant
-
2011-12-06, 12:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
It would be odd for a Sorcerer/Wizard not to, but even a high level Cleric or Druid can legitimately fill up all their spell slots for the day without having a ranged attack or a means of reaching the opponent.
That aside, why is it a bad thing for Fighters to need ranged weapons? Weapons are sort of their thing. Taking their second Weapon Training in bows and grabbing one or two ranged feats seems fine.
I don't play Fighters myself, but I haven't heard anything but praise from my friends who do.
edit: On second thought, probably better not to derail the thread in a Fighter debate. I hear those can get pretty long.
3.5 was getting so huge that my group stopped using it specifically to avoid bloat and unforseen powergaming options. Still, you're right. Paizo designed it specifically so that the rulesets are still compatible in most cases.Last edited by Real Sorceror; 2011-12-06 at 12:04 AM.
-
2011-12-06, 12:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
I'd download the Core Rulebook, but only because the 3.5 ones are out of print. Everything is almost perfectly compatible.
Avatar of Rudisplork Avatar of PC-dom and Slayer of the Internet. Extended sig
GitP Regulars as: Vestiges Spells Weapons Races Deities Feats Soulmelds/Veils
-
2011-12-06, 12:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Newcastle, Australia
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
How is that a Balance issue?
If you have a caster in the group you should be buffing the group with the useful spells than be selfish with things like Fly.
Tiers are what you make of them - many seem to like them but over all they are but another way of stating what you think is good vs what anyone else thinks is good.
PF has added quite a lot of nice things to the game and the massive added bonus is that all the important stuff - core rules, classes etc is freely available online.
If you don't like it for the fact that you believe it didn't fix X,Y or Z then you are valid to not like it but that does not make it any less of a great continuation of D&D 3.5Last edited by Leon; 2011-12-06 at 12:27 AM.
Thankyou to NEOPhyte for the Techpriest Engiseer
Spoiler
Current PC's
Ravia Del'Karro (Magos Biologis Errant)
Katarina (Ordo Malleus Interrogator)
Emberly (Fire Elemental former Chef)
Peril Planet
-
2011-12-06, 12:12 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Minnesota
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Avatar of George the Dragon Slayer, from the upcoming Indivisible!
My Steam profile
Warriors and Wuxia, Callos_DeTerran's ToB setting
-
2011-12-06, 12:26 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Newcastle, Australia
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
If you don't have a caster (which is completely possible) then you will find other ways around a problem than a over reliance on magic to solve everything.
Even if you have another cleric in the group its still a better group that is Supported by the classes than can do so rather than have them be solo paragons.
Really who needs to play anything.... all classes are valid choices for anyone to play.Last edited by Leon; 2011-12-06 at 12:28 AM.
Thankyou to NEOPhyte for the Techpriest Engiseer
Spoiler
Current PC's
Ravia Del'Karro (Magos Biologis Errant)
Katarina (Ordo Malleus Interrogator)
Emberly (Fire Elemental former Chef)
Peril Planet
-
2011-12-06, 12:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Clerics, even in 3.5, are only a better option as a frontliner in my opinion if you get to spend several rounds buffing or you can use some tricks (Multiple Nightsticks and Divine Metamagic) to make some buffs all day duration.
That's not always an option because of limited book selection or other tweaks.
What I like most about Pathfinder is they don't just fire off a base class and forget about it, they continue to offer support with new Archetypes and expanded lists of selectables like Rogue Talents.
Oh, and they tweaked some famously poor classes to make me, at least, actually want to play them. Monks and Paladins come to mind.
-
2011-12-06, 12:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Pathfinder does not fix 3.5's balance issues. If balance is your primary aim, that's what 4e is for.
(Or Legend maybe; yeah, give that a go.)Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2011-12-06, 12:54 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Pathfinder Adventure Paths make it worth it. I'm running Kingmaker for the second time. Also, a lot of the Alternate Class Features are really fun to use. There is less emphasis on multiclassing and prestige classes. For the fighter and flying enemies bit, I didn't see it as too much of a limit in normal play.
Either get a potion of fly, or have an alchemist in the group and drink one of their extracts of fly.
That said, the Advanced Player's Guide classes are a lot of fun, Alchemist and Witch especially. The Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Magic classes aren't quite as interesting in my opinion, I'd only get those books for the Alternate Class Features.Spoiler
-
2011-12-06, 12:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- NYC
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
It's a real shame that the Pathfinder books seem to have taken the aesthetic philosophy of "exactly like 3.5". 4e has much nicer everything, from art to layout to branding. And the pretty pictures are the only reason to own dead tree material rather than just use the free version.
-
2011-12-06, 01:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
Whaaaaaat?
Wayne Reynolds is god. Shame on you.
Ok, show of hands here. How many of you have actually played Pathfinder and looked through the Core Rulebook? Because I'm getting the feeling that a lot of you are very unfamiliar with the system and are just going off hearsay or what you saw in Beta testing.
-
2011-12-06, 01:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
Re: Should I get Pathfinder?
I don't much care for pathfinder. I looked it over. Some things are "improved." Others aren't. Overall, it simply isn't worth learning the new system for some questionable improvements over 3.5, not when I already know 3.5 and enjoy it just fine as it is.
If you have some sort of problem with 3.5, maybe pathfinder changes that particular thing, but maybe it doesn't. Look it over and see if it does. But overall, unless you're dissatisfied with 3.5 for whatever reason, I'd just stick with it as is. Well, not only would I, that's what I am doing.
P.S: 3.5 fixed Fighters. They just misspelled the name of the class when they released the update - it's spelled "Warblade" now.-Do you honestly think that we believe ourselves evil? My friend, we seek only good. It's just that our definitions don't quite match.-
Ailanreanter, Arcanaloth