Pathfinder vs. 3.5E?

[Pinotage]

It changes quite a lot of things, and there is certainly a concern that it's not as compatible as it was. Things I think it addresses fairly well now:

15 minute working day
Simplification of rules (Grappling, polymorph)
Improving 1st level survival
Improved Skills
Smoother management of encounters/CRs

I think there are still quite a few areas which are more problematic to address:

High level NPCs
High level Play/DMing
Christmas Tree Effect
Combat Tracking (buff spells, etc.)

The Beta will hopefuilly improve the compatibility and some of the other issues that are still outstanding. But it is difficult to address some issues without breaking compatibility completely, and at the same time given the vast amounts of Wotc (i.e. non-OGC) material out there that people use (the Complete books for example) it will never be entirely compatible.

Pinotage

 

[Zurai]

Have the people who are complaining about backwards compatibility actually sat down and tried to convert a module or adventure to Pathfinder rules?

I have. It's fast work. Converting an entire module took me about half an hour.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Have the people who are complaining about backwards compatibility actually sat down and tried to convert a module or adventure to Pathfinder rules?

I have. It's fast work. Converting an entire module took me about half an hour.

Adventures aren't the issue. Its trying to mesh Pathfinder with the Complete Series, Expanded Psionics, Book of 9 Swords and the rest and manage 3.5E style multiclassing.

That I'm not looking forward to.

 

[Kerrick]

Pathfinder's other stated goal is to remain easily compatible with 3.5. But every single change it makes to the rules takes it a small step away from that goal. As it is now, Pathfinder seems like it'll be at least as different from 3.5 (if not more different) than 3.5 was from 3.0;

And people bitched and complained because 3.5 was, overall, such a small change that it didn't really warrant an entirely new set of books. What did they change, really? The ranger got an upgrade, some spells got nerfed, and... they got rid of partial actions and facing.

I'm not saying it shouldn't make any changes at all, but each one should be carefully weighed ONLY on the question of "does this fix an aspect of 3.5 that is a problem for everyone playing the game?"

You'll never be able to answer "yes" to that question, because you'll never be able to get "everyone" to agree that something is broken. It's just like people were talking about with the "Mearls on the OGL" thread - everyone's got their own ideas of what works and what doesn't, and that's why there was never a serious, sweeping upgrade to d20.

Pathfinder isn't going to be the great cure-all for D&D; it's just one company's vision (with input from the masses) of changes that "should" be made.

The Beta will hopefuilly improve the compatibility and some of the other issues that are still outstanding. But it is difficult to address some issues without breaking compatibility completely, and at the same time given the vast amounts of Wotc (i.e. non-OGC) material out there that people use (the Complete books for example) it will never be entirely compatible.

See, that's something else that people keep ignoring. You can't balance new thing against every supplement out there; you balance it against the core. Paizo should be rebalancing and fixing things with only the core rules in mind - not everything else. If they get a stable and workable set of core rules, then they can go about providing a conversion guide for all the other stuff.

 

[xechnao]

Adventures aren't the issue. Its trying to mesh Pathfinder with the Complete Series, Expanded Psionics, Book of 9 Swords and the rest and manage 3.5E style multiclassing.

That I'm not looking forward to.

Βut Pathfinder tries to fix the broken parts. It can't be compatible with something broken that fixes and still be compatible with the broken parts. It makes no sense. So there has to be a compromise here. If you complain about the need of compromise and the dialog you need to have to achieve it then you are only bringing negativity to the project.

 

[Kerrick]

Adventures aren't the issue. Its trying to mesh Pathfinder with the Complete Series, Expanded Psionics, Book of 9 Swords and the rest and manage 3.5E style multiclassing.

That I'm not looking forward to.

You should try the fractional BAB/saves house rule:

When gaining a level in a second class, instead of applying the base BAB/saves, do the following:

Good BAB – add +1
Medium BAB – add +0.66
Poor – add +0.5

High save: add +0.5
Medium save: add +0.4
Poor save: add +0.33

Round up if above .5, down if below

 

[I'm A Banana]

I would be rather shocked and awed if Pathfinder didn't have a "conversion manual" that made everything fairly cake.

The biggest fear is not being able to use your old core/prestige classes? I guess I don't see how PF is invalidating those.

 

[Khairn]

Space for improvements equals me houseruling whatever edition I am playing, just as I have always done.

What I am really saying is that Pathfinder needs to be looked at without a grudge for/against WotC. Very few people are doing that right now. After the whole edition change blows over, Pathfinder will either succeed or fail on its own merits.

I agree that ultimately Pathfinder will succeed or fail based on its own merits. And despite the current level of passionate opinions from all corners of the gaming community I think the end goal of a great game is how the majority of PFRPG fans are looking at it.

But with Paizo / Pathfinder being a very visible alternative to WotC / 4E, I don't see the strife over the edition change blowing over any time soon. With each new power, path or ritual from WotC, and beta revision and tweak from Paizo the edition wars will just heat up once again.

 

[Zurai]

Adventures aren't the issue. Its trying to mesh Pathfinder with the Complete Series, Expanded Psionics, Book of 9 Swords and the rest and manage 3.5E style multiclassing.

How does PF not mesh with those sources, in your opinion?

 

[Gundark]

Well that's the problem with PF...they have to be different to justify "hey buy me!!!". So in the end the game is going to look a lot different than 3.5

Edit: Problem is the wrong word. but I can't think of another right now.