D&D 5E Character Advancement versus Pathfinder

[Ancalagon]

Another system coming out soon: warhammer frpg 4e

 

[billd91]

The primary difference between Pathfinder and 5E is the difference between optimized and non-optimized characters. While there are a few things that can be done to min-max your character in 5E, regular characters don't lag very far behind, making min-maxing less efficient than Pathfinder. This means that character creation and leveling don't have to take nearly as long to do, but players who like system mastery benefits sometimes find it lacking.

Something else to consider, is that Pathfinder is about to release a second edition. If you can, you are probably better off waiting for that to be released, rather than trying to get all the books for the first edition system.

I play both PF and 5e and enjoy both - they both scratch slightly different itches and in slightly different ways that I appreciate. That said, I'm looking forward to the PF 2e play test. As much as I've enjoyed what they've done, the game was based on making sure that the 3.5-edition of D&D was still supported with 90% compatible material and they skipped putting a lot of effort into rewriting and organizing the rules for clarity. They did a much clearer job with their Beginner Box and I hope that they will be devoting that kind of effort in presenting their 2nd edition. As someone relatively new to the game and looking into trying PF, I hope that you'd find 2e a more approachable rule set. That is, however, months down the road.

I think 5e suffers a bit in some organizational ways - some rules that belong together are scattered about. But it's also a good game - well worth checking out. Not as many rich options as PF, but also less complex in trying to figure out how things interact. I hope you get a chance to check both of them out in the next couple of years.

 

[dco]

I think developers simplified 5e too much in some aspects, but at least I find the corebook far more balanced and consequently playable.

Pathfinder has a lot of options to max the sum of countless bonuses and penalties, to avoid the rigid movement and attack restrictions, etc. A lot of those options are so necessary that feel mandatory, as some magic items, a tax more than an option. Balance can be absurd, you can find differences between players as someone with 130 skill points and another one with 10 at level 10 as I've seen in my table, a guy who does 1-2 things out of combat and another that can do everything.

 

[Ovarwa]

Hi, Options for advancement: Pathfinder has far more options. But there's a lot of junk to wade through also. If you seek options, look no further. Options for optimization: Pathfinder has far more options. But D&D5 has plenty of options to last at least a single campaign, even for players who care about optimizing. D&D5's options are not going to break your game accidentally either. Balance: D&D5. What? Nothing more to say? Yup. Ease of Play: D&D5. Realism: Neither. Fun: The only thing in the cave is what you take with you. Recommended Reading: Treantmonk has been a fan of both Pathfinder and D&D5. He has well-regarded wizard optimization guides for both games. I recommend reading both guides, which will provide a feel for differences between systems from the perspective of a respected optimizer. Overall conclusion: If you want better (in the sense of more evolved, more balanced, more curated), go for D&D5. If you want more stuff to play with, go for Pathfinder. Neither is a mistake. Other options for D&D-like games: 13th Age. There's an SRD. It's really worth looking at. Anyway, Ken