Pathfinder 1E Disenchanted with Pathfinder

[Stormonu]

I've been following Pathfinder since its inception, but this past month is the first time our game has veered back to an attempt of a 3.X system, so we're using PF right now. I was leery of some of the changes (unending cantrips and channel energy), but excited over others (CMB/CMD, fighter changes, skill changes). So far, half-way through our first adventure, and I like it pretty good. Fights aren't overly long, there's been plenty going on between combats and I've been enjoying myself overall so far.

We've got six players in my group, and we're using a tweaked hit point rule I picked up from another person's game (x2 HP at 1st level, but no add'l hit points at 2nd, and regular from there on out). The game's just as dangerous and exciting as I remember it, and I don't feel constricted by 3.5's rule/sourcebook bloat or the box I felt put in with 4E as a player. We'll see how future adventures go, and I've already told the group I'm not planning to play past 12th-14th, so this seems to be the game for me.

I do have some issues with the game (how bardic song is handled, for one) and I'm sure I'll run into more, so I know the game is not perfect. Still, I find myself much more in line with PF's direction in continuing 3E than I did with 4E's new direction with mechanics and fluff.

 

[airwalkrr]

They seemed to try to balance out the classes by powering them up. But they powered up all the classes, not just the weak ones.

This sums up my primary issue with PF more than any other. I thought, going in, that adjustments to the fighter, monk, and maybe the sorcerer were warranted. And for that, I like the changes to the fighter and sorcerer most. But they overhauled just about every class from what I can tell. The changes were as big as or more than the changes from 3.0 to 3.5. That wasn't what I was hoping for.

On the other hand I realize it is difficult to want to put down $50 for a product that only makes a handful of tweaks. So in that respect, Paizo's hands were tied. They HAD to make SOME significant changes or there would be little reason for most of their customers to buy it.

If I hadn't moved beyond my desire to "fix" systems by house-ruling out the wazoo, I would probably incorporate a few changes from PF into my game. But since I really don't try to do that anymore, I either use a system or I don't. As it stands, I think I still prefer regular ole' 3.5 to PF.

Thanks to everyone for their feedback in this thread. At the very least, it has helped me realize I'm not alone.

 

[fireinthedust]

I disagree, as most of the changes mentioned seem to be fairly good to me.


The class changes I think were needed. They overhauled all of them with fan support; the final forms are the way they are due to thousands of playtesters meeting and discussing and voting on what they liked and what they would buy.

Wizards are given more options in terms of specialization, but those schools are penalized, not cancelled out (ie: my ilusionist can still fight back vs. constructs). That and they were given another option than Familiars, so a class option isn't wasted on something they might not use (ie: I have a magic staff like Gandalf, who wouldn't use a familiar). Otherwise, same wizard except for spell tweaks. Still as powerful, not really more.

Other classes were made, in my mind, more interesting over time: Paladins have something worth getting after 6th level (Mercies), and spell-casting levels aren't slowed (ie: saves and caster level are my character level, so I'm not in trouble vs. BBEG who can't not save against a vastly lower CL paladin). That's a big deal.
Ditto the Monk. Other things were done to shake stuff up: Barbarian now has options during Rage, so it's not just a static bonus and the same barbarian every single time. This isn't more powerful.

I'm trying it out on these boards, and making up my own PC group as I go along also, to get a handle on the rules. I don't mind getting back after this playtest/run through.

Regardless, just doing the math in my head I'm more confident in this rule set than I am with 3.5.

 

[Twowolves]

I'd suggest giving it a fair shake. $10 for the PDF (or free for the SRD) and pick up a one-shot module of your choice ($4 for a Pathfinder Society Scenario that will run you right at 4 hours). For $14 you can play an evening's worth of Pathfinder and decide for yourself if the changes you don't like are a big deal or not, or if the subtle changes changed more than you expected.

Case in point: I heard a lot of complains on message boards about the "15 minute workday". I didn't buy it, but ok, whatever. At first glance, the infinate cantrip seemed like their work-around, at least at low level. But then, in play, we realized that the change to how you ID magic items meant that you could use those potions, scrolls and wands (that you normally picked up as loot and stuffed in your bag to be Identified later) immediately. This and the Channel Energy clerical feature allowed a low level party to press on even when memorized spells and hp were low (potions, scrolls and wands, + channel energy fixed all that).

Otherwise, without knowing what, specifically you were hoping for or don't like, there is no way to address your nebulous feelings of ill-at-ease.

 

[Desdichado]

I would never have bought the Pathfinder and Bestiary books if they weren't pdf's for $10 each. A good deal compared to 4e? Yeah, well, I was still totally happy with my 3.5 game. That's not a good deal compared to... already bought, so no further expense.

But, for $10/each, it's worth it for the art alone. Which I can extract from the pdf, and print off to show my players.

As it turns out, I also swiped a few rules from the PFRPG to serve as houserules into my 3.5 game (namely the skill consolidation and combat manuevers rules), but I swiped just as much from Trailblazer, to create my "ultimate" 3.75 hybrid.

 

[gamerprinter]

Play the game you want

I basically still like 3.5, and though our group has lots of 3.5 books, if you need more - its not on bookshelves anymore. You have to go to EBay, Noble Knight, whatever, but that's not very consistent. Pathfinder is the closest to 3.5 that is current and you can buy books for, at the same time being backwards compatible.

If you don't like a change in a class, go back to 3.5 regarding that class. Better still, you're sure to find variations of your favorite 3.5 class for PF, made by a 3pp - there's plenty of such content being generated. Don't discount the 3pp's for PF goodness - something you really won't see much of for 4e (3pp support).

I like Pathfinder and being a new 3pp, working with the OGL and PF Compatibility license lets me get involved.

If its not your game, play what you want to - you don't need to apologize for it.

Frankly, I'm glad that didn't create a complete replacement, WotC did and I don't care for the new system, but that's just me. Pathfinder close enough to 3.5 to satisfy most fans, and has been tweaked to a better state (IMO) and keeps the "D&D" I prefer still on the bookshelves.

GP

 

[Falling Icicle]

This sums up my primary issue with PF more than any other. I thought, going in, that adjustments to the fighter, monk, and maybe the sorcerer were warranted. And for that, I like the changes to the fighter and sorcerer most. But they overhauled just about every class from what I can tell. The changes were as big as or more than the changes from 3.0 to 3.5. That wasn't what I was hoping for.

Most of the changes made to other classes are just giving them other options, like letting wizards choose a bonded item instead of a familiar or letting Druids choose a domain instead of an animal companion. Yeah, wizards now get a few special things from their choice of specialty school, but those abilities are pretty minor and not a significant power-up for the class. Clerics got buffed with channel energy and domain powers, but nerfed by losing heavy armor and quite a few spells per day, so I'd call it even there. Druids definitely got nerfed, with the changes to wild shape (which were totally justified) and the loss of several spells per day.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

CMB/CMD, something I thought was a really great idea when they first introduced it. I was never one who complained grapple was clunky, but then I thought unifying the combat maneuvers under a single mechanic was a good idea. That was until my group dropped pf and we went back to 3.5. Trip, bull rush, grapple, overrun, all of them are actually pretty simple when you just read them. I actually did that with my group one night. I said "We are going to sit down for 15 minutes and I am going to read and explain this nebulous little section of the PH." We did, and we really haven't had any problems since. Seems the problem was, no one had ever bothered consulting these sections until they needed them, and when they did need them, they just wanted to get it over with so they didn't pay close attention.

Skills. Well, I was just unhappy with the way it turned out. I didn't like the way you could just put a point in everything and get a big bonus. I still don't think the 3.5 skill system is perfect, but I'm not sure what needs to be done to fix it. Whatever it is, pf didn't do it for me.

Those are just some examples. Since you brought them up it just reminded me how unsatisfied I was with the final product.

Chances are I will still pay attention to pf. I'm just not sure I'll ever buy it.

yes, I think this is a preference issue, because the very two issues you cite are two of my top five reasons I prefer Pathfinder. the maneuver mechanics in PF dramatically simplified the process of maneuvers as experienced during my prior years of 3.5 play; we as a group were quite familiar with the mechanics of special maneuvers in D&D, and grappling alone was responsible for lengthy debates and conflict as to its use and abuse over time; it didn't help that I ran games for a group of savvy rules lawyers who were constantly looking for the breaking point. Pathfinder's simplified and more universal approach greatly appeals to me.

The skills, personally, were very vexing to me in 3.X, and Pathfinder's fix was actually the "straw" that made this camel buy it, heh! I was notorious in 3.5 for gimping my characters with poor skill choices because I would go for RP-focused skills first, and end up with characters that knew a little about a whole lot, or who had skill points tied up in obscure skills of little consequence. Pathfinder presented a very smooth and intelligent way of dispensing the akward 1/2 point cross-class skill mechanic that I disliked, as well as tightening the main skill system up and making choices more meaningful in character generation. Now, getting a skill insures you are at least decent at it, and there is less overall sacrifice on the player's part when making these choices.

The addition of traits and special options to character classes appears to have injected extra flavor and interest among my players. I have had no reports of dislike on the extra options; on the contrary, the diversity of options has made all fo my players a bit more invested in terms of interest and progression...they seem to really like seeing where their character will go, what he will become.

There are many more little and big fixes, but in the end, I was someone who stopped playing 3.5 at the end of 2006 with many minor issues adding up to a large collective one. Pathfinder definitely brought me back to 3.X with its additions/evolutions!

 

[Sigurd]

I'm a little worried about skill variety and the promotion of new feats like 'craft left handed bludgeoning weapon'. In 3.5 publishers had the tendency to add a skill or a craft when they added a cool item. A typical example is 'craft poison' supplanting 'craft alchemy'.
If you specialize too much you lock people out of the endeavor because they don't have the skill points or the feats available. Still, in order to get the last word publishers must be very tempted to do this. Pathfinder has a jump on this process with its reboot and I'm being careful not to let it happen in my games.


Sigurd

 

[Voadam]

Consider houseruling some spells into 3.5 from PF.

Dispel magic is only one check and only one recalculation.

Save or dies mostly now damage of one sort or another.

Save or suck mostly hold person style save each round.

Polymorph and summons split into multiple spells.

These are nice improvements IMO. You can get them from the srd free too.