Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
3.5 vs. Pathfinder
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="enrious" data-source="post: 5666396" data-attributes="member: 2126"><p>Yeah, we all seem to realize that the real enemy is the Palladium players and not each other.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Let me give you my perspective as to why. You say a 1st level Cleric has to know 20-30 spells to intelligently decide what spells to know etc. - I disagree.</p><p></p><p>A cleric player needs to have the ability to read over the summary list of spells to see which ones jump out at him as being potentially viable, then quickly read through them to see if they are and even then, probably 80% of them will always be memorized each and every day. Call them his bread and butter spells. The only time he'll need to decide on new ones is when he gains levels, which means glancing over the spells he's already glanced over (if he hasn't gained a new spell level) or over the relatively short list of new spells of a new spell level. Thus, the only ability required is to glance over a summary list and decide which ones to research.</p><p></p><p>Sure, the cleric player could and probably should read over each and every spell available to them, but this is by no means required, in any edition.</p><p></p><p>But grappling? Sure the fighter/monk who specializes in grappling needs to know those rules as does the DM. But the cleric or wizard who have no interest in grappling had better learn it in about 30 seconds for when a monster grabs 'em...or hope their memory of it from reading the rules on grappling from last campaign are accurate. And hope that everyone remembers the rules the same way, because otherwise I guarantee you one person (and that's all it takes) to remember it differently for the game to grind to a halt while people feverishly flip through the book hoping for a way to save the aformentioned wizard.</p><p></p><p>In other words, no player is safe from having to know the grapple rules, but non-cleric players don't need to know the cleric spells available - that's the cleric player's job.</p><p></p><p>Thus, the grapple rules should, in my opinion, be as streamlined, simple, and unambiguous as possible because knowing, like red and blue lasers, is half the battle.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That .1% seems to come up in our games a bit more than any specific feat/spell/skill in the game, nevermind if it's a rarely used feat/spell/skill. Let's face it, pick a campaign. A majority of the spells/feats/skills that are selected by the players are the exact same ones selected by the players in the last campaign. And the campaign before that. And the campaign before that. And in the next campaign. It's not like you need to memorize every single possible one, only the ones that are new for you. And only the player using them needs to know that, plus the DM. </p><p></p><p>But grappling? Everyone. On top of AoOs. And actions. And special attacks. And so on. And that's just combat.</p><p></p><p>Here's another fun .1% of the rules - counterspelling. I guarantee you that none of us know how it works (ok, I do because I made a counterspeller) but no one else does because it's not relevant <em>to them</em>, unlike grappling.</p><p></p><p>That .1% of text equates to more than .1% of game time, in my experience. Given that, I don't feel like I'm asking a lot by asking for them to be easier to use.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I apologize for breaking your paragraph up here, but let me stop you. I can say this with perfect confidence.</p><p></p><p>No one in my group, including myself with 25 years of gaming experience going back to 1e, the most experienced player with 23 years of gaming experience going back to 1e, to the least experienced player with 8 years of experience starting at the beginning of 3.5 read the entirety of the rules ad infinitum.</p><p></p><p>We don't have time. Real life doesn't permit this for us. Not even close. I'm the only who spends any time at all looking at any rpg forum, the only one who reads any of the pathfinder/3.5 books outside of our game sessions and that's only because I'm the DM. And I envy them.</p><p></p><p>We get together to have fun, to socialize, and to have fun and socialize. It is but only a small part of our lives, and for the most part, the only time we all come together at the same time as a group.</p><p></p><p>Because of this, yeah, I want the grappling rules streamlined. I'd rather spend time playing instead of fighting the rules to have fun.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I hear you and would agree that Pathfinder doesn't lessen the workload for a player or DM, compared to 3.x.</p><p></p><p>However, we've found that it doesn't increase it either and it had enough that appealed to us to warrant the switch.</p><p></p><p>But certainly, I would say that if what's in it doesn't have enough appeal, you are *not* losing anything by sticking with 3.x.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As I glance over my substantial 3.x library, I realize that exactly the same amount of materials that 3.5 invalidated were invalidated by Pathfinder, which is to say none. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Oh, I'd say it was very necessary to Paizo for it to be published, due to the nature of their business model.</p><p></p><p>I think the real issue is whether or not there's a compelling reason for a group to switch to it - and I think on that, we both agree that there isn't, because people can have fun with either set of rules.</p><p></p><p>And to me, that's the only criteria that matters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="enrious, post: 5666396, member: 2126"] Yeah, we all seem to realize that the real enemy is the Palladium players and not each other. Let me give you my perspective as to why. You say a 1st level Cleric has to know 20-30 spells to intelligently decide what spells to know etc. - I disagree. A cleric player needs to have the ability to read over the summary list of spells to see which ones jump out at him as being potentially viable, then quickly read through them to see if they are and even then, probably 80% of them will always be memorized each and every day. Call them his bread and butter spells. The only time he'll need to decide on new ones is when he gains levels, which means glancing over the spells he's already glanced over (if he hasn't gained a new spell level) or over the relatively short list of new spells of a new spell level. Thus, the only ability required is to glance over a summary list and decide which ones to research. Sure, the cleric player could and probably should read over each and every spell available to them, but this is by no means required, in any edition. But grappling? Sure the fighter/monk who specializes in grappling needs to know those rules as does the DM. But the cleric or wizard who have no interest in grappling had better learn it in about 30 seconds for when a monster grabs 'em...or hope their memory of it from reading the rules on grappling from last campaign are accurate. And hope that everyone remembers the rules the same way, because otherwise I guarantee you one person (and that's all it takes) to remember it differently for the game to grind to a halt while people feverishly flip through the book hoping for a way to save the aformentioned wizard. In other words, no player is safe from having to know the grapple rules, but non-cleric players don't need to know the cleric spells available - that's the cleric player's job. Thus, the grapple rules should, in my opinion, be as streamlined, simple, and unambiguous as possible because knowing, like red and blue lasers, is half the battle. That .1% seems to come up in our games a bit more than any specific feat/spell/skill in the game, nevermind if it's a rarely used feat/spell/skill. Let's face it, pick a campaign. A majority of the spells/feats/skills that are selected by the players are the exact same ones selected by the players in the last campaign. And the campaign before that. And the campaign before that. And in the next campaign. It's not like you need to memorize every single possible one, only the ones that are new for you. And only the player using them needs to know that, plus the DM. But grappling? Everyone. On top of AoOs. And actions. And special attacks. And so on. And that's just combat. Here's another fun .1% of the rules - counterspelling. I guarantee you that none of us know how it works (ok, I do because I made a counterspeller) but no one else does because it's not relevant [i]to them[/i], unlike grappling. That .1% of text equates to more than .1% of game time, in my experience. Given that, I don't feel like I'm asking a lot by asking for them to be easier to use. I apologize for breaking your paragraph up here, but let me stop you. I can say this with perfect confidence. No one in my group, including myself with 25 years of gaming experience going back to 1e, the most experienced player with 23 years of gaming experience going back to 1e, to the least experienced player with 8 years of experience starting at the beginning of 3.5 read the entirety of the rules ad infinitum. We don't have time. Real life doesn't permit this for us. Not even close. I'm the only who spends any time at all looking at any rpg forum, the only one who reads any of the pathfinder/3.5 books outside of our game sessions and that's only because I'm the DM. And I envy them. We get together to have fun, to socialize, and to have fun and socialize. It is but only a small part of our lives, and for the most part, the only time we all come together at the same time as a group. Because of this, yeah, I want the grappling rules streamlined. I'd rather spend time playing instead of fighting the rules to have fun. I hear you and would agree that Pathfinder doesn't lessen the workload for a player or DM, compared to 3.x. However, we've found that it doesn't increase it either and it had enough that appealed to us to warrant the switch. But certainly, I would say that if what's in it doesn't have enough appeal, you are *not* losing anything by sticking with 3.x. As I glance over my substantial 3.x library, I realize that exactly the same amount of materials that 3.5 invalidated were invalidated by Pathfinder, which is to say none. Oh, I'd say it was very necessary to Paizo for it to be published, due to the nature of their business model. I think the real issue is whether or not there's a compelling reason for a group to switch to it - and I think on that, we both agree that there isn't, because people can have fun with either set of rules. And to me, that's the only criteria that matters. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
3.5 vs. Pathfinder
Top