D&D 3E/3.5 3.5e Splatbook Characters in Pathfinder

[Michael Hopcroft]

I haven't gotten into Pathfinder yet, but I still have some of the D&D 3.5 splatbooks such as the Complete series. What I'm wondering is how usable some of the characters and classes (and other material) for these books are in Pathfinder (which I still tend to refer to as "D&D 3.75") and how many changes need to be made to make them worth the trouble.

Of course, many of those classes were not that workable in 3.5. Hexblades struck me as a cool character concept, but apparently nearly impossible to make work in play (and of course they're a closed content class, so some things will be little help in dealing with them, such as most chargen software).

I'm not obsessive about the game or the system (there are other games and systems about which I am) but I am curious about whether people bother with this.

 

[Queranil]

I recently switched to pathfinder, but refuse to throw away all the 3.5 material. So far it works well. We have a Ninja in the party who isn't objecting (IMHO they were a little overpowered anyway in 3.5) and a rogue/swashbuckler.

I think the classes in the splatbooks gain more abilities as they leven up compared to the old coreclasses like sorcerer and cleric.

That said, I always consult the pathfinder books first before consulting 3.5 splatbooks (spells, feats etc) and you'll have to pay a little attention to balance and compatability. But it works fine for me. There are some prestige classes that could need some adjustments in order to make the appealing again in pathfinder though.

 

[pawsplay]

Assuming hit dice adjustment and using the Pathfinder skill list:

The Scout still plays fine as-is. I personally rewrite their 20th level ability to be a little less surreal. Highlands Stalker is still a decent prestige class to move into from Scout.

The Hexblade was always tricky and remains so. To keep up, they would probably need some kind of talent/trick scheme similar to a rogue or witch's, that gradually increased the utility of their hexes, enhanced their spellcasting, and added some more combat abilities.

The Samurai is as weak under Pf as it was under 3.5 (sorry). Play a Cavalier or Fighter, or check out the new Samurai playtest.

Ninja works fine. It's a little strong at damage at some levels, but overall a little weaker than the rogue, and remains so.

Beguiler works fine, and benefits from the revised skill list. Warmage works fine. Dread necromancer works fine; in fact, I think it fits in well with the new bloodline and school powers of the core casters.

Favored Soul was always a dubious thing. You could still play one, if you absolutely insisted. Personally, I'd just try to talk the GM into letting you play a spontaneous cleric a la Unearthed Arcana. The Oracle covers similar ground as well.

Spellthief - playable under 3.5, but the weirdness gets weirder under Pf, with more classes having SLAs and such. Probably a bit weak, though a d8 hit die would help them to some extent.

Psionic classes - Psion and wilder are still playable. The revised Soulblade was a little weak under 3.5, and decided underpowered in Pathfinder. Some 3pps have played around with making proper updates to the Pathfinder rules set.

Archivist - If you keep a close eye on their spell acquisition ability, still a solid and interesting option.

 

[Glade Riven]

Stronger 3.5 splat classes need the fewest changes, while weak classes need the most. Prestige classes may not need any work at all - 3.5 pathfinder prestige class and PFRPG core version are the same. Prereqs may still need tweeking due to the change in skills.

Eberron's artificer just needs a few cantrips and maybe a hit-die adjustment. Bo9S classes are already overpowered, so they just need skills changed (except swordsage needs hd adjusted, too), and the warblade may still be overpowered due to their easy of maneuver recharge. I haven't heard any issues with weapons of legacy.

Overall, I doubt it is much more work than balancing splat elements under 3.5. The APG has a lot of alternate options for core classes that could be adopted to adjust old 3.5 classes.

 

[Tovec]

In the game I'm currently running I'm allowing only the PF Core and APG (with some races from Bestiary). Everything is running smoothly but both my players and myself have been missing some of the other stuff available in the 3.5 and 3.0 books.

In my next game(s) I plan to open up what is available to play to include much of 3e but with that in mind I don't plan to allow many non-PF base classes. They aren't needed anymore, the variants in APG covers nearly all of them. Yes there is probably one player in my game who will still want to play a Ninja, and others who want to play other things but I'm predicting these will be the exception as opposed to the rule.
Whenever a class, race, prestige, feat or what have you is allowed going forward it will not be "brought up to power" in any real way. Previous houserules about any of the breaks or fixes will still be in place but I have no plans to bring the Samurai class into the Pathfinder age. The only changes I will do will be in line with PF rules, such as barbarian rage, sneak attack, things like that.
The main thing I expect to see for all my future games will be someone playing prestige classes we used to use and love in the old days. Like Bear Warrior or things like that. My previous ruling of no Tome of Battle or Psionics will still stay in effect. So I won't have to deal with anyone trying to bring in a Warblade and having to deal with its effects on the system.

That's just my two cents, I hope you get the idea of what I mean.

 

[pawsplay]

Bo9S classes are already overpowered, so they just need skills changed (except swordsage needs hd adjusted, too), and the warblade may still be overpowered due to their easy of maneuver recharge.

There are concerns with the warblade, but the performance tests over at CO showed they weren't necessarily better damage dealers than a fighter or barbarian. They did have a sweeter skill list, but even that's less of an issue under Pathfinder.