Pathfinder vs. 3.5E?
- Thread starter thecasualoblivion
- Start date
Remathilis
Legend
My 2 cp.
I have a 3.5 game I'm setting down for a while to play 4e. However, I've debated re-picking up said 3.5 game in Pathfinder down the road. However, I'm in the boat with a few of the other doubters; how much is change for change sake vs. legitimately fixing broken rules?
My big concern (as others have pointed out) is mixing non-core 3.5 with pathfinder. Specifically, I worry about mixing some of these newly powered base classes with non-core feats, PrCs and the like to create even more uber PCs than either WotC had considered when making them or Paizo took into mind during the upgrade. In essence, the quality control on both sides falls off (WotC: PrC #344 isn't broken because a fighter can only have X feats, Paizo: Our fighters have Y feats, we never considered the ramification of this on PrC #344) so it falls to me (more so than now) to make sure things don't fall off the Abyss.
While I do like a number of the overall fixes done (and I don't mind adding a bit to half-orcs, monks, fighters, and sorcerers) I am leery of the sheer power-escalation pathfinder grants and how that effects the multitude of 3.5 material I already use.
(and to pre-answer the question: I don't consider much of my 3.0 compatible; I rarely use my 3.0 books since 3.5 came out).
I have a 3.5 game I'm setting down for a while to play 4e. However, I've debated re-picking up said 3.5 game in Pathfinder down the road. However, I'm in the boat with a few of the other doubters; how much is change for change sake vs. legitimately fixing broken rules?
My big concern (as others have pointed out) is mixing non-core 3.5 with pathfinder. Specifically, I worry about mixing some of these newly powered base classes with non-core feats, PrCs and the like to create even more uber PCs than either WotC had considered when making them or Paizo took into mind during the upgrade. In essence, the quality control on both sides falls off (WotC: PrC #344 isn't broken because a fighter can only have X feats, Paizo: Our fighters have Y feats, we never considered the ramification of this on PrC #344) so it falls to me (more so than now) to make sure things don't fall off the Abyss.
While I do like a number of the overall fixes done (and I don't mind adding a bit to half-orcs, monks, fighters, and sorcerers) I am leery of the sheer power-escalation pathfinder grants and how that effects the multitude of 3.5 material I already use.
(and to pre-answer the question: I don't consider much of my 3.0 compatible; I rarely use my 3.0 books since 3.5 came out).
thecasualoblivion
First Post
xechnao said:
I can't judge hypotheticals, and I can't see the future. The only information I have to form an opinion on Pathfinder is what they have produced so far, and it isn't a good opinion.
thecasualoblivion
First Post
xechnao said:
I'm sorry I have to say this, but do you have anything to add to this discussion besides saying "think positive" to doubters?
Phlebas
First Post
for what its worth
i was one of the people who was initially hesitant about 4E because i was quite enjoying both DM'ing and playing 3,5E
4e now its released is very obviously a different game from 3,5e with a different approach required (not saying good / bad, just saying different)
pathfinder (and i've playtested alpha 2 & 3 with my regular group) seems to fall into that middle ground of being recognisable, interchangeable with my books, but have some new ideas that seem to fall into the category of 'very common house rules' with the added benefit of being thoroughly playtested and pulled together as a consistent system.
like most changes, it will fail to please all of the people all of the time - (just look at 4e's reception...) but it offers an alternative approach that is worth applauding, regardless of wether its an approach that you will adopt whole heartedly, mine for ideas, or sidestep completely
If you love 3,5e - stay with it!
If your moving to 4e - enjoy!
if you want to tweak 3,5e without going to 4e, you could do a lot worse than pathfinder
i was one of the people who was initially hesitant about 4E because i was quite enjoying both DM'ing and playing 3,5E
4e now its released is very obviously a different game from 3,5e with a different approach required (not saying good / bad, just saying different)
pathfinder (and i've playtested alpha 2 & 3 with my regular group) seems to fall into that middle ground of being recognisable, interchangeable with my books, but have some new ideas that seem to fall into the category of 'very common house rules' with the added benefit of being thoroughly playtested and pulled together as a consistent system.
like most changes, it will fail to please all of the people all of the time - (just look at 4e's reception...) but it offers an alternative approach that is worth applauding, regardless of wether its an approach that you will adopt whole heartedly, mine for ideas, or sidestep completely
If you love 3,5e - stay with it!
If your moving to 4e - enjoy!
if you want to tweak 3,5e without going to 4e, you could do a lot worse than pathfinder
Similar Threads
