Pathfinder 1E A question for Pathfinder lovers.

[firesnakearies]

I've looked through the Pathfinder beta book, and it looks pretty neat. I have a question, though, for those of you who played 3.0/3.5 D&D, and are now avid players and fans of Pathfinder.

What's awesome about Pathfinder, compared to 3.5 D&D? What, if any, are the biggest, coolest changes from D&D to Pathfinder?

If you knew someone who didn't especially care for 3.5 D&D very much, and he asked you, "What will I like about Pathfinder? Why should I try it?" what would you say to him?
​

 

[EricNoah]

The whole pathfinder situation is very interesting to me because it allows for a couple of different scenarios. I could go "all-Pathfinder" but still use adventures and materials designed for 3.5. I could go "some Pathfinder, some 3.5", blending the games, taking what I liked most from each edition. Or I could continue to go basically "all-3.5" but still take advantage of Paizo's adventures. So to me the most exciting thing is the backwards compatibility.

To someone who is already playing 3.5, there might not be a great reason to go "all-Pathfinder" but I think they will want at least a passing familiarity with it so they can take advantage of future adventure publications from Paizo, which will all be for Patfhinder though easily usable in 3.5.

To someone who is not playing 3.5 or 3.0 because they found something better, or because they inherently don't like 3.x ... I can't think of a good reason to "come back" by way of Pathfinder. I don't think its rule-changes are going to be so ground-breaking as to lure folks back who are already gone, and I don't think it's going to solve the issue of the game's complexity at higher levels.

I personally am going to continue to run a 3.5 game, and have Patfhfinder rules on hand as a deep source of potential house rules. I might port some stuff like Combat Maneuver rules over to 3.5. I'll also want to have the Pathfinder rules on hand to help with converting future Paizo adventures back to 3.5 as much as necessary. I'll also be very eager to see what they do with the Bestiary - how much rules/stat tweaking they do. If they make enough interesting changes, it will be like having a big book full of variant SRD monsters and that would be well worth the price of admission.

 

[Papa-DRB]

In *my* opinion and in no particular order, the following changes/new stuff is what sold me on Pathfinder.

o CMB (grapple, trip, etc.) is one mechanic
o Cleric channeling rules
o Sorcerer bloodlines
o Wizard schools (but I understand they will be more in tune with 3.5, maybe but not likely some house rules here)
o Standardizing Druid Wildshape and Arcane Polymorph rules
o Boosts to the non-major spellcasting classes
o Most save or die spells changed

Some non-rule reasons
o I *like* 3.5 and my players don't care about system one way or the other, so I get to pick
o Paizo adventures and the ability to "on the fly" make any changes from 3.5 to Pathfinder RPG
o a) I have weaned my guys from the glut of 3.0/3.5 Race of this and Complete that books and have no intention of going back
b) If I do allow some 3.5 stuff, it is minimal conversion

 

[NMC]

I'll second the comments about sorcerous bloodlines (which I think provide an interesting aspect of character development) and clerics' channeling (which lets them be the healer and do interesting things with their spells). I also like the adaptability, since my previous campaigns have been set in Green Ronin's Freeport for 3.0/3.5 and I don't have to do much conversion.

-Nate

 

[Stalker0]

Most of pathfinder I could take or leave, but there are a few things I really like:

1) The classes: The classes seem more flavorful, provide more customization, and seem to scale better at high levels.

2) Spell tweaking: So far I agree with many of the changes that have been made to tweak spells.


The skills and CMB mechanics I could take or leave.

 

[Aus_Snow]

If you knew someone who didn't especially care for 3.5 D&D very much, and he asked you, "What will I like about Pathfinder? Why should I try it?" what would you say to him?

To be honest, I wouldn't try 'selling it' to anyone who didn't like (or wouldn't like / have liked) 3e. That's because um, *it is* 3e, but tweaked (or reworked; whatever) so that (in theory) it'll play better, and generally be more fun for all.

So, I dunno, maybe 'they' should just look elsewhere. Pathfinder does indeed play well, and can be great fun (IME), but there are plenty of games out there, and I might even (given that they don't like 3e, right?) suggest one or more of them, to check out.

 

[kitsune9]

I've looked through the Pathfinder beta book, and it looks pretty neat. I have a question, though, for those of you who played 3.0/3.5 D&D, and are now avid players and fans of Pathfinder.

What's awesome about Pathfinder, compared to 3.5 D&D? What, if any, are the biggest, coolest changes from D&D to Pathfinder?

If you knew someone who didn't especially care for 3.5 D&D very much, and he asked you, "What will I like about Pathfinder? Why should I try it?" what would you say to him?
​

I like the treatment of the classes. They've boosted them up a bit and made the sorcerer really stand out from the wizard. Clerics are pretty cool with their channel power ability.

If you're against power creep or want to play a more retro'd D&D with less, Pathfinder won't be that.

 

[LurkMonkey]

I've looked through the Pathfinder beta book, and it looks pretty neat. I have a question, though, for those of you who played 3.0/3.5 D&D, and are now avid players and fans of Pathfinder.​

What's awesome about Pathfinder, compared to 3.5 D&D? What, if any, are the biggest, coolest changes from D&D to Pathfinder?​

If you knew someone who didn't especially care for 3.5 D&D very much, and he asked you, "What will I like about Pathfinder? Why should I try it?" what would you say to him?​

To me there are two major selling points:

1. The game is backwards-compatible with my fairly-complete library of 3/3.5 books. Obviously this will not play for someone who doesn't like 3E, and most likely if you didn't like 3E you're not going to like Pathfinder. Honestly there aren't that many major changes, as backwards-compatibility to OGL materials was their main focus.

2. The 'fluff' (their world of Golarion/the Pathfinder Chronicles/Companion books/Adventure Paths) is just unbeatable. Well-thought out, expertly illustrated and frankly fascinating. Also, more mature in theme than many others are willing to go. Easily my favorite 'campaign setting' by far, even counting my all-time fave Planescape.

There are folks who spend a lot of effort rejiggering Paizo's materials to 4E stats just because their fluff is so cool. I think if you are the type of gamer who likes fascinating, thought-provoking, well-written fluff, Paizo has that covered hands down, no matter what dice mechanic you prefer.

 

[Voadam]

1 Redone spells to change save or die and polymorph.

2 Simplified skill math.

3 Changed grapple.

4 At will cantrips so wizards don't use crossbows

5 hp suggestions to make 1st level less fragile.