D&D 3E/3.5 I gotz me a wall full o' 3.5
Kaiyanwang
First Post
I found it being an improved version of the game, with an higher amount of useful material per book. I really enjoy PF.
I strongly suggest to try it out. You can take a look to the material through theyr PRD.
The PRD features currently material from Core Rulebook, Bestiary, Advanced Player's Guide and Game Master's Guide.
CR and B are the core you need to play. Once you get a grasp on the rules, I strongly suggest the APG.
I personally play in a PF only game, but a lot of people use PF with their 3.5 matherial, successfully. In the paizo website you can download a guide for character conversion.
Perhaps, when importing 3.5 matherial, have care of comparing the power level to the PF options.
I strongly suggest to try it out. You can take a look to the material through theyr PRD.
The PRD features currently material from Core Rulebook, Bestiary, Advanced Player's Guide and Game Master's Guide.
CR and B are the core you need to play. Once you get a grasp on the rules, I strongly suggest the APG.
I personally play in a PF only game, but a lot of people use PF with their 3.5 matherial, successfully. In the paizo website you can download a guide for character conversion.
Perhaps, when importing 3.5 matherial, have care of comparing the power level to the PF options.
Crothian
First Post
What do you mean by bork?
I've been playing Pathfinder in a campaign since last August. We only use Pathfinder books published by Paizo and we have found it to be a great game. We have a Wizard, Druid, fighter and Paladin and we are 10th level. But this point in 3.5 everyone would have at least one prestige class and the fighter and Paladin would be no better then cheerleaders in most fights. But in Pathfinder no one has taken a prestige class and while the Druid and wizard kick butt with some devestating spells the ability of the fighter and paladin are right there with them and maybe even more so.
I've been playing Pathfinder in a campaign since last August. We only use Pathfinder books published by Paizo and we have found it to be a great game. We have a Wizard, Druid, fighter and Paladin and we are 10th level. But this point in 3.5 everyone would have at least one prestige class and the fighter and Paladin would be no better then cheerleaders in most fights. But in Pathfinder no one has taken a prestige class and while the Druid and wizard kick butt with some devestating spells the ability of the fighter and paladin are right there with them and maybe even more so.
IronWolf
blank
What things frustrate you about 3.5? That might help determine if Pathfinder is a good fit.
I really like Pathfinder and was a former 3.5 player. Pathfinder is my game of choice now. I am sure you can find broken things, especially as additional rule books beyond the Core rulebook is released. That seems to happen anytime the amount of rules and additional options increases - it leads to combinations that were not expected.
But as for me, I have no regrets moving to Pathfinder.
I really like Pathfinder and was a former 3.5 player. Pathfinder is my game of choice now. I am sure you can find broken things, especially as additional rule books beyond the Core rulebook is released. That seems to happen anytime the amount of rules and additional options increases - it leads to combinations that were not expected.
But as for me, I have no regrets moving to Pathfinder.
DragonLancer
Adventurer
All I can say is that PF is a vast improvement over 3.5 and my games have been much more enjoyable since moving over to it.
Personally the only things I use from 3.5 days are the collection of monster sourcebooks and Relics & Rituals: Excalibur.
Personally the only things I use from 3.5 days are the collection of monster sourcebooks and Relics & Rituals: Excalibur.
Jared Rascher
Explorer
Core Pathfinder is an improvement over 3.5. That's a fairly simple equation. Not only are the classes a bit more interesting, but the consolidation of mechanics into Combat Maneuvers is great, being able to build encounters based on XP budgets is really handy, and some of the simple templates, like Advanced and Giant are wonderful for boosting something that you want into an appropriate challenge without much hassle.
I can't put my finger on it perfectly, but the way the Bestiary monsters are laid out makes it very easy for me to use them out of the book as is, in a way I could never get used to doing with 3.5 books. I'm sure part of it is the fact that there are rarely multiple monsters on the same page, but something is visually pleasing and easy to follow about the layout of the monsters.
When it comes to rules clarifications . . . the Paizo staff are on the forums often and communicate with the fanbase . . . but they seem to either give contradictory information or give really hesitant answers that don't fully fix problems. In other words, unless you are going to get into organized play, figure out how you want to resolve something, tell your players, and don't wait for the official ruling, because you might get none or multiple, contradictory rulings.
Now, depending on what bugs you about 3.5, here is where some of my 3.5 issues began to rear their heads again.
The Advanced Player's Guide is not, overall, a bad book, but there are some landmines in it. The Summoner may not be as bad as it seems, but its such a complex class that its very easy for someone to screw up, not realize it, and create some really wonky eidolon combinations. The point based creation method isn't the friendliest way to go compared to, say, animal companions.
New spells in the APG also open up some ground that hasn't been trod in the core rulebooks, and does some things that 3.5 did in introducing "iconic" abilities early with lower level spells. For example, Vanish allows invisibility from day one in the campaign for 1 round/level. Also, some spells don't seem nearly as problematic until they get used a lot. The pit spells have become my least favorite chain of spells ("well, it was going to be hard for the whole party to function in this encounter given the size of the room and the number of enemies, but now that there is a 10 x 10 pit in the room, half the party should go out and have pizza until the pit spell expires").
A friend of mine picked up Ultimate Magic to see if I would allow it into the campaign, and I'm seeing a lot of headaches in that book. When Paizo is on, they are really, really good at d20. When they are bad they are just as bad as WOTC in its worst 3.5 books.
I'd tell you to look on the PRD, but thus far, they haven't gotten the Bestiary 2 or Ultimate Magic in there yet, even though they have said that its a priority, just not as much of a priority as getting more books ready for Gen Con.
I can't put my finger on it perfectly, but the way the Bestiary monsters are laid out makes it very easy for me to use them out of the book as is, in a way I could never get used to doing with 3.5 books. I'm sure part of it is the fact that there are rarely multiple monsters on the same page, but something is visually pleasing and easy to follow about the layout of the monsters.
When it comes to rules clarifications . . . the Paizo staff are on the forums often and communicate with the fanbase . . . but they seem to either give contradictory information or give really hesitant answers that don't fully fix problems. In other words, unless you are going to get into organized play, figure out how you want to resolve something, tell your players, and don't wait for the official ruling, because you might get none or multiple, contradictory rulings.
Now, depending on what bugs you about 3.5, here is where some of my 3.5 issues began to rear their heads again.
The Advanced Player's Guide is not, overall, a bad book, but there are some landmines in it. The Summoner may not be as bad as it seems, but its such a complex class that its very easy for someone to screw up, not realize it, and create some really wonky eidolon combinations. The point based creation method isn't the friendliest way to go compared to, say, animal companions.
New spells in the APG also open up some ground that hasn't been trod in the core rulebooks, and does some things that 3.5 did in introducing "iconic" abilities early with lower level spells. For example, Vanish allows invisibility from day one in the campaign for 1 round/level. Also, some spells don't seem nearly as problematic until they get used a lot. The pit spells have become my least favorite chain of spells ("well, it was going to be hard for the whole party to function in this encounter given the size of the room and the number of enemies, but now that there is a 10 x 10 pit in the room, half the party should go out and have pizza until the pit spell expires").
A friend of mine picked up Ultimate Magic to see if I would allow it into the campaign, and I'm seeing a lot of headaches in that book. When Paizo is on, they are really, really good at d20. When they are bad they are just as bad as WOTC in its worst 3.5 books.
I'd tell you to look on the PRD, but thus far, they haven't gotten the Bestiary 2 or Ultimate Magic in there yet, even though they have said that its a priority, just not as much of a priority as getting more books ready for Gen Con.
Glade Riven
Adventurer
The best part is that your wall of 3.5 stuff is not invalidated, and can be converted - although with the options that are avalable through the AGP, Ultimate Magic, and soon-to-be Ultimate Combat, there's just so much good stuff that it isn't worth dealing with the jankyness of some of the 3.5 material.
Paizo encourages judgement calls of the individual game master. In other words, Paizo trusts your judgement. Ultimate magic has a whole chapter on creating custom spells, golems, and anything magical - and gives players a legitimate way to tinker with things. This can be a little annoying to a strict rules lawyer, but part of trusting your judgement is that if you are a rules lawyer type GM, you can put your foot down.
As far as converting - gear usually works fine, although certain spells have changed a little bit (polymorph type, especially). If the class was a little strong under 3.5, the only change may be to check the BAB/HD ratio. If the class was weak, more work would be required - and it may be better to make it an archetype of a current class (since many 3.5 classes were minor variants of core). PF races are +1/2 to +1 compared to 3.5 races. CR is a little more accurate in Pathfinder, but the rule of thumb is (3.5 CR) - 1; the only thing you need to add is a combat maneuver bonus and a combat maneuver defense stat, but that's super-easy.
oh, and d20pfsrd does a better job of keeping up-to-date on the rules, even a bunch of 3rd party stuff.
Paizo encourages judgement calls of the individual game master. In other words, Paizo trusts your judgement. Ultimate magic has a whole chapter on creating custom spells, golems, and anything magical - and gives players a legitimate way to tinker with things. This can be a little annoying to a strict rules lawyer, but part of trusting your judgement is that if you are a rules lawyer type GM, you can put your foot down.
As far as converting - gear usually works fine, although certain spells have changed a little bit (polymorph type, especially). If the class was a little strong under 3.5, the only change may be to check the BAB/HD ratio. If the class was weak, more work would be required - and it may be better to make it an archetype of a current class (since many 3.5 classes were minor variants of core). PF races are +1/2 to +1 compared to 3.5 races. CR is a little more accurate in Pathfinder, but the rule of thumb is (3.5 CR) - 1; the only thing you need to add is a combat maneuver bonus and a combat maneuver defense stat, but that's super-easy.
oh, and d20pfsrd does a better job of keeping up-to-date on the rules, even a bunch of 3rd party stuff.
Last edited:
