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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zil" data-source="post: 5350742" data-attributes="member: 20004">I'm not sure what a half-vampire is, but an undead revenant who sold his soul to Baal for revenge doesn't sound LG.  Perhaps this character could be a fallen Paladin, but not a Paladin by the rules.Pathfinder focuses on the core races for players.  Even the Advanced Players Guide didn't introduce new player races.   However the final decision on allowed races for a game is in the GMs hands.  It's not really something that has to be codified in a core rules book.The Experience Penalty thing isn't in the Pathfinder rules, but the classes now have many more advantages for staying within a single class so players are less likely to dip into many classes.  There are no dead class levels like you saw in 3.0/3.5.  I don't exactly see where Pathfinder encourages players to play monsters more than in 3.0/3.5 or 4E.  Are you looking for a statement that says "Thou shalt not play anything but races x, y and z"?    I don't think that should really be necessary, but the focus in PF is clearly on the core races.I would say that the player race issue is really more of a campaign setting thing.  Let's say someone wanted to use Pathfinder to run a Planescape game.  In that case you'd expect some greater leeway as to player races.  On the other hand, if the GM wants to run a more standard campaign he'd be entirely in his right to limit the player races to the standard races in the players handbook or even a subset of those.I'm sure a multiclassed Sorcerer/Wizard will suffer as much as in 3.5 so no change there.  However, there's much less reason to multiclass now so hopefully players won't be as tempted to min/min their characters that way. I've been pleased with the NPC bard that's been tagging along with the players in the Crimson Throne campaign I've been running.  I've used bards before as NPC companions for the players in 2.5/3.0/3.5 and the Pathfinder version seems more effective than those in the past, at least in a strong supporting NPC role.  Pathfinder's treatment of CR is much better than in 3.0/3/5.  EL is a thing of the past now.I'm curious why you stopped following the Pathfinder adventure path after they switched to the Pathfinder Rules.  Pathfinder and 3.5 are not that far apart mechanically and it is quite easy to switch things back and forth.  I do it all the time with the Crimson Throne (switching 3.5 to Pathfinder on the fly).  I suspect it wouldn't be all that hard to convert things the other way.  Getting back to why Pathfinder, my reasons would be :1/ A fully supported 3.x style rule set.2/ Better balanced classes.  Revitalized for many.3/ More reasons to stay single-classed (no dead levels)4/ Better treatment of monster CR5/ Options for XP advancement rates (slow/med/fast). 6/ The Combat Manoeuvrer system (CMB/CMD) 7/ Some cleaned up spells8/ An excuse for having a break with some of the game-breaking 3.x rulebooks (e.g. Book of Exalted Deeds, etc)9/ Sorcerer bloodlines10/ Clerics and the Channel Energy change11/ Hey, it's Paizo!12/ The option to keep using your 3.x library if you wish13/ It's all OGL! (okay, not the list of gods and Golarion stuff, but the rest of the rules are)14/ It's the new shiny! 15/ Paizo rocks!</blockquote>

Verification