Pathfinder 1E Sell me on Pathfinder....

[pawsplay]

Three things you could do tonight to improve your 3.5 game:

1. Switch to the Pf experience system.
2. Calculate CMB and CMD and switch to the Pf combat maneuver system.
3. Use the Pf versions of the fighter and sorcerer.

Tada! Now you're playing 3.75 and a happier, more well-adjusted person.

 

[Aus_Snow]

3a. and paladin.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

3a. and paladin.

3a1 And maybe the Barbarian.

The Auld Grump, but sorcerers rock.

 

[pawsplay]

There's a lot of good stuff. I named the fighter and sorcerer because they both needed a mild power-up to save them from prestige class hell and because they didn't require much in the way of new mechanics. Both paladins and barbarians underwent a number of mechanical changes. Sorcerers and fighters, though? Blow and go.

 

[Oryan77]

Three things you could do tonight to improve your 3.5 game:

1. Switch to the Pf experience system.
2. Calculate CMB and CMD and switch to the Pf combat maneuver system.
3. Use the Pf versions of the fighter and sorcerer.

Tada! Now you're playing 3.75 and a happier, more well-adjusted person.

I didn't realize there was a new XP chart for PF. I like how it has XP suggestions for how fast or slow you want PCs to level. I prefer slower leveling and I currently give half xp to slow things down. Would the PF xp chart be more balanced than simply dividing xp in half?

I read over the combat maneuver rules. I'm not that good at judging a rules system. What are the benefits of using the CMB & CMD rules over just doing combat maneuvers the normal 3.5 way? Players don'g use those maneuvers very often so I don't really have a feel for how well they do or don't work in 3.5.

So if I was to remove 3.5 Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins, & Sorcerers, and used PF versions instead, they would all mix well with the rest of the core 3.5 classes? Would they also be balanced vs 3.5 monsters?

Thanks for the feedback guys. I'm really taking all of this into consideration. I don't want to fully switch systems, but I'm interested in making improvements to things that were not that great in 3.5. So if I can easily make this stuff work, then great!

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

I read over the combat maneuver rules. I'm not that good at judging a rules system. What are the benefits of using the CMB & CMD rules over just doing combat maneuvers the normal 3.5 way? Players don'g use those maneuvers very often so I don't really have a feel for how well they do or don't work in 3.5.

You actually might find that your players would use those options more often - Paizo's made it a very streamlined, easily understood mechanic, where before it was a morass of different rules and dice rolls.

 

[pawsplay]

So if I was to remove 3.5 Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins, & Sorcerers, and used PF versions instead, they would all mix well with the rest of the core 3.5 classes?

Sure. Bards, too. If you're going that far, you might want to go ahead and replace ALL the classes. The wizard abilities are just sort of nice and the new cleric domains are overall a better design. Druids are simpler, actually.

Would they also be balanced vs 3.5 monsters?

Sure. No one gains anything inappropriate for their level, and really only fighters are going to see the basic numbers move much (and if you have been using the PHB2, they still get a boost but not quite as much).

 

[Samurai]

You actually might find that your players would use those options more often - Paizo's made it a very streamlined, easily understood mechanic, where before it was a morass of different rules and dice rolls.

Exactly... in our group, almost no one ever tried maneuvers in 3.5 except our 1 spiked-chain character who used trip all the time. Now that it's just a simple CMB roll, all the characters are using it a lot more.

 

[Samurai]

So if I was to remove 3.5 Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins, & Sorcerers, and used PF versions instead, they would all mix well with the rest of the core 3.5 classes?

You know what? Just use all PF classes instead. All of them were improved. For instance, I'm playing a druid. The ability to choose 1 cleric domain instead of an animal companion was very nice, and I took it. Also, Wild Shape has been substantially changed due to PF's new polymorphing rules, which should make it much simpler to use, though I'm not high enough level to use it yet.

And Clerics were improved greatly as well... now that they can Channel Energy to heal, they can use their spells for something besides Cure Wounds.

And Cleric domains, Sorcerer Bloodlines, and Wizard specialties almost all provide a basic attack mode usable 3+ main ability mod times per day that is preferable to resorting to a crossbow after you've fired your 1 or 2 spells for the day at 1st level... now you have an additional 6-7 firebolts/force missiles/etc before you have to resort to weapons.

Also, Rogues get a lot of cool choices for additional abilities at much lower level than 3.5, which can make each Rogue more unique.

The point is, every class is improved and given more options, more things they can do. I know that if I were in a game that said we'll be using these PF classes and these 3.5 classes, I'd always pick a PF class. Just do yourself a favor and use all of PF as the base, and then throw in some additional material from the Spell Compendium, Complete books, etc if you want. That's really the best way.

 

[ssampier]

Wow. You guys make this sound really cool.

How much time to convert from 3.0/3.5? I have lots of 3.x books I have never used from Eberron to Necromancer Games scenarios.