Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder vs. Arcana Evolved?

[zen_hydra]

Opinions desired

The classes and races from Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved have generally been considered more powerful than the D&D 3.5 classes and races.

Assuming that the above is true:

- How do the classes from Arcana Evolved stack-up to the classes from Pathfinder in terms of power?

- How do the Arcana Evolved races compare to the Pathfinder races?

- Would it be harder or easier to balance the Arcana Evolved classes and races to the Pathfinder level than it is to upgrade D&D 3.5 classes and races to Pathfinder standards?

- Assuming that the the Arcana Evolved classes are weaker than the Pathfinder classes, would something as simple as adding bonus feats at all of a classes dead levels be a viable fix?

- Compared to the Pathfinder h-to-h classes (e.g. Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin) how do the Warmain and Unfettered compare? What about the Pathfinder Monk versus the Oathsworn?

- How unbalanced would a Warmain, or Unfettered, with the Ritual Warrior's Combat Rite progression added to them be compared to the Pathfinder classes?

- Combat-wise the Akashic always seemed a bit weak compared to the other Arcana Evolved classes, what do you think should be done to bring it up to the strength of the Pathfinder classes?

 

[Azgulor]

I don't agree with the premise that the AE races are more powerful. If you factor in Racial Levels, yes, but the base races, no.

For example: Littorans, Mohg, Sibbecai, & Verrick all recieve +2 / -2 to stats vs. PF's +2 / +2 / -2 spread.

Giants, Dracha, and Faen present additional abilities and trade-offs based on their size/physiology.

I believe bringing the AE classes up to PF power-level would be marginally easier than doing the same to 3.5. The variation in power isn't that great from what I can see. I've only used some AE classes in play rather than a full AE campaign so perhaps there's more of a power difference than I'm seeing.

If you give races an extra +2 stat, use PF skill allocation, and fill in the occasional AE dead class level with a Bonus Feat, I'll think you'll be pretty close. All of the AE classes seem fairly easy to Pathfinderize but I haven't done it yet.

As a point of comparison, however, I think Adamant's Tome of Secrets Swashbuckler is superior to AE's Unfettered. Wizard & Magister don't seem to be that far apart at first glance.

 

[Azgulor]

One item I overlooked. Some of the AE classes have an odd (from a 3.5/PF point of view) Save progression such as 3 "Medium" saves vs. 2-good/1-bad or 2-bad/1-good. You may need to tweak them to bring them closer in line with their PF counterparts.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I also don't think AE is much more or at all more powerful than 3.5 races/classes, I don't even agree with the premise. A simple way to balance the races would be to remove the -2 stat. Or add another +2 if it seems more relevant for the race, whatever.

Classes is tougher...largely because I never knew if in a merged game the AE classes should be kept strictly on their own feat and spell lists. It seems more balanced (with 3.5) that way, but it also puts this wierd barrier up between the two when relating with each other. Especially in cases for example, where a D&D character can just pick up a feat, but for an AE character, it's gained through ceremony despite being identical otherwise. I also always am tempted to compact AE's 25 levels down to 20, since the stuff gained beyond 20 isn't that much more powerful (compared to what epic is like in 3E), and a lot of those abilities seem like cool class-unique "capstones."

I do not see why you'd need to alter the medium saves. I quite like them. My only change would be possibly to start them at +1 and still reach +9 at level 20. It seems wrong that the "median" of +0 or +2 save at level 1 is +0.

 

[Doodles]

I also do not agree with the premise that classes and races in AE would be somehow more powerful that D&D 3.5's. I've had a lot of actual play experiences with a AE, D&D and blends of both, and my experience just does not find anything to agree with in that statement.

As for comparing Pathfinder and AE, it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges, in my mind. On one hand, you have basically a reprint of 3.5 rules with a few key changes, and in the other, you have a complete variant Player's Handbook. One wants to extend and build upon the previously existing game while the other provides a completely different gamut of game aesthetics. We're just not talking about the same types of products at all, here.

An interesting thought would be to upgrade AE to mesh well with the Pathfinder rules, however. That could lead to all sorts of new venues for players of both games and any shades in between.

 

[Obryn]

From running both 3.5 and Arcana Evolved in close succession, I would agree that - overall - AE's classes are a little more powerful than 3.5's. With some caveats, though.

* Spellcasters in AE are more powerful than spellcasters in 3.5. Their power + versatility are enormous. They aren't so bad without the various magic-enhancing Feats, but with those feats they're insane. Particularly Templates... I've gone into this elsewhere, but I've decided that the claim that magic-users are less powerful in AE had to have been made in jest. Spamming variable-element ultra-long-range double-save-required fire/water/air/earthballs is just the start of the wackiness. And while Save-or-Dies might technically be gone, I see very little difference between Vitrification (save or turn into very fragile glass) and Death.

* Warmains, IMO, are basically 3.5 Fighters+1. They may be around the same badassery level as the PF fighter; I am not familiar enough with PF's fighters to comment.

* Unfettered can get insane ACs, but they're fairly balanced, overall. Probably one of the best lightly-armored-fighter classes ever.

* Akashics are better than straight-up Rogues at Skill-Monkeying, but they trail in damage potential. (Although the armor + weapon proficiencies help make this up a bit.) Also, they are awesome - probably one of the coolest skill-monkey classes ever.

* Witches are a bit underpowered, and their class structure is a bit perplexing. Ditto, Oathsworn. Oathsworn are less MAD than monks, but they also lack a lot of the cool features. (Unless, that is, your game routinely features X-TREME survival situations, in which case those unarmed combat robots will dominate.)

* Totem Warriors, Champions, Mageblades, Runethanes, and Ritual Warriors are all just about right. Advancing the Totem Warrior's animal friend can be a bear (ha!) but they all work pretty well. I've heard broken stuff about Runethanes, but in my limited experience they're not so bad.

-O