Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 5255212" data-attributes="member: 7635">I used to be a near-kitchen sink 3.5-er (Towards the end, I didn't allow new systems like ToB or ToM) but switching to Pathfinder has given me a new respect for core. In fact, Core + APG playtests IS my current PF game. In 4e, I found I couldn't stay core for long. Too many options were missing. No bard, monk, gnome, half-orc, or druid. V shape classes ALL looked the same (your choice for powers was: which one is my prime. I'll take that one) and those who weren't still felt very samey and flat. Oh, and the MM lacked 1/3rd of the monsters I wanted, the magic-item selection in the PHB was a joke (I called AV the 4th core book) and the game felt, for all purposes, 1/2 done using just the 1st set of books. Things improved after PHB2, MM2, and AV2, but by that point I'd have sunk $200 into the game to make it feel "playable", and I'd need another 100 to get the -Power books to give a character any sort of diversity. :-/ Granted, I found 3.5 core dull as dishwater also, but it was a functional dull. I didn't feel I was missing anything, I just knew there was "more interesting" stuff out there. In 4e, I always felt I was missing things.  PF did an even BETTER job of making 3e feel "complete" (though I think it could use more cleric domains) and the proof is so far, no one (save one player) has complained about the "core only" thing yet. My players using just the PHB would have balked months ago...</blockquote>

Verification