Is Paizo's Pathfinder really compatible with 3.5?

[GMforPowergamers]

See my problem is this with all the core classes being upgraded (and I REALY wish I were a fly on the wall when someone said "Lets give the wizard MORE) what happens to non core classes. If I want to play a Psion, or Warlock, thenI need the DM to remake the class.

Now maybe there are people who argue psion is op (I do not belive they are any more op then sorcerer), but no one thinks the Warlock is. If the sorcerer gets his base cool stuff and better HD and an at willl ray attack, then they totaly blow warlock out of the water.

then we can have those great arguements "well X class is equal to the new stuff" "No Y class is too strong" "Z class is too weak."

then repate this with every feat, spell, item.

So how do you fix that, simple only use Pathfinder...oh, wait then you have a new edtion anyway...

 

[Merlin's Shadow]

Indeed. This is one of the awesome things about 4e, and if Pathfinder follows along the same design model that is a good thing for Pathfinder players and DMs. Especially DMs.

I guess I have a hard time understanding this attitude. The people I have gamed with never had a problem "not playing by the rules" behind the screen. Even if the game seemed to encourage it, we always tweaked and twisted to our heart's content while DMing whatever the "rules" said. That just seemed like the natural way of things to us. :shrug:

 

[Remathilis]

See my problem is this with all the core classes being upgraded (and I REALY wish I were a fly on the wall when someone said "Lets give the wizard MORE) what happens to non core classes. If I want to play a Psion, or Warlock, thenI need the DM to remake the class.

Now maybe there are people who argue psion is op (I do not belive they are any more op then sorcerer), but no one thinks the Warlock is. If the sorcerer gets his base cool stuff and better HD and an at willl ray attack, then they totaly blow warlock out of the water.

then we can have those great arguments "well X class is equal to the new stuff" "No Y class is too strong" "Z class is too weak."

then repeat this with every feat, spell, item.

So how do you fix that, simple only use Pathfinder...oh, wait then you have a new edition anyway...

That's my problem as well. Its great if your game is mostly core-only, but 3.5 is full of great options (duskblade, knight) and some not-so-great (hexblade, swashbuckler) that could use some love. Sadly, the nature of the beast is that your core-stuff is golden, monsters can be fudged, but you knight/warmage/spellsword is going to need some work to figure out if its balanced...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

That's my problem as well. Its great if your game is mostly core-only, but 3.5 is full of great options (duskblade, knight) and some not-so-great (hexblade, swashbuckler) that could use some love. Sadly, the nature of the beast is that your core-stuff is golden, monsters can be fudged, but you knight/warmage/spellsword is going to need some work to figure out if its balanced...

You know what I find funny, people who on one hand complain "I don't want to buy new books I spent $X on 3.5 so I want to keep it" then in there next breath say "Pathfinder is the best"

 

[gribble]

BAB/Grapple? Rename Grapple CMB.

Err... you mean subtract 3 and rename to CMB, right? One of the things PF did was change the size modifiers to grapple from +4/8/16/etc to +1/2/4/etc.

Small change, but one that makes a big difference. And one I don't personally like because it does hurt backwards compatibility a bit.

I've been running a Rise of the Runelords campaign this last year with PFRPG PCs - finished Sunday in fact with a TPK in the final encounter...

But I digress. I've found as a GM it's very easy to convert on the fly. The two main things are CMB and skills (I tend to just use these as printed, taking the higher of Spot & Listen for Perception, etc). I also tend to give opponents a few more HP as well - generally an extra 10-20%.

I have found the PCs to be quite overpowered though. I'm not sure it's a problem with the PF rules per se, but more with how they interact with a lot of the 3.5 splatbooks. For the next campaign (Curse of the Crimson Throne), I gave the players the choice of either Pathfinder only or 3.5 only. They chose 3.5...

 

[Herremann the Wise]

You know what I find funny, people who on one hand complain "I don't want to buy new books I spent on 3.5 so I want to keep it" then in there next breath say "Pathfinder is the best"

Allow me then if possible to take some of the humour out of it. Let's say I have spent a whole heap of money on 3.5 (I have most of the splats) and I'm looking for some new material. Since I no longer have the option of buying much new stuff specifically for 3.5, I then look to getting into either 4E or possibly Pathfinder. If I get into 4E, I have a new ruleset to learn as well as at least the 3 core books before I even get started - my previous collection gets put on the backburner. Since, I like my splats, I'm looking at a whole heap more dollars (which may be cool if you like where 4E took the game or not). Or, I can get into Pathfinder which means my 3.5 collection is not invalidated and I get "new" material for a system I enjoy. If I like the changes pathfinder made then even better. Pathfinder seems like a valid option.

I don't know, seems a reasonable position to me.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Allow me then if possible to take some of the humour out of it. Let's say I have spent a whole heap of money on 3.5 (I have most of the splats) and I'm looking for some new material. Since I no longer have the option of buying much new stuff specifically for 3.5, I then look to getting into either 4E or possibly Pathfinder. If I get into 4E, I have a new ruleset to learn as well as at least the 3 core books before I even get started - my previous collection gets put on the backburner. Since, I like my splats, I'm looking at a whole heap more dollars (which may be cool if you like where 4E took the game or not). Or, I can get into Pathfinder which means my 3.5 collection is not invalidated and I get "new" material for a system I enjoy. If I like the changes pathfinder made then even better. Pathfinder seems like a valid option.

I don't know, seems a reasonable position to me.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

That's pretty much how I see it. I can use all of my 3x material easier with Pathfinder than I can with 4E. I have the 4E core rulebooks, I've tried doing conversions from Basic modules even to 4E and it's really too much of a pain in the arse to do so. Not to mention that a lot of the 3x crunch are useless with 4E, they are in essence 2 completely different games.

 

[Krensky]

As far as compatibility...I don't know if I would say that Pathfinder is BACKWARDS compatible, so much as I would say it is designed so that 3.5 is FORWARDS compatible. I can't imagine trying to work pathfinder character options and feats into my 3.5 campaign. Others may have had great luck with that, though.

You've got those backwards.

Pathfinder is backwards compatible because it accepts input from 3.5 with no conversion of note. 3.5 would be forwards compatible if it could use Pathfinder with no conversion of note.

 

[Krensky]

And that's why I'm not a fan of the phrase "Backwards Compatible." That, and because it infers that 3.5 is "backwards" or "not as good." While I, personally, like what we've done with PF RPG better than 3.5, the 3.5 rules are still perfectly usable as is.

Pathfinder is a new version of the 3.5 rule set. It can use material from it's direct ancestor with little to no adjustment. Pathfinder is backwards compatible with 3.5.

Where's the inference to 3.5 being anything other then older?

 

[Wicht]

Exactly.

I pull up a griffon off of the SRD for my pathfinder game...what do I need to change?Size? No change
HD? No change
Init? No change
Speed? No change
Armor Class? No change
BAB/Grapple? Rename Grapple CMB.

As pointed out already, the change from grapple to CMB will change the bonus.

In the end though, your point stands. Even if you forget that the size bonuses have changed its really no big thing in the long run. I've been running 3.5 adventures using the Beta rules and about the only changes I make to the NPCs is recalculating their grapple. Normally I don't even bother updating the class abilities and it all works out fine in the end. If anything it gives my players a little edge which is fine.