Pathfinder 1E Sell me on Pathfinder!

[Voadam]

Quick summary of changes

Spells: Save or die turned into save or take a bunch of damage.

Spells: Save or suck turned into hold person style save each round.

Spells: Polymorph types split into multiple spells that each give PHII style wildshape form changes (keep your stats but get some mods to them instead of full change to monster stats).

Spells: Dispel magic only affects one spell (much quicker to recalculate effects in combat).

Grapple, bull rush, disarm, etc.: All use one mechanic (grapple attack modifier vs grapple defense modifier), size bonuses reduced from +4 to +1, and language used is less ambiguous.

Skills: No x4 skill points at 1st level.

Skills: Both class skills and cross-class skills costs 1 skill point per rank.

Skills: Class skills get a +3 bonus.

Skills: skill list condensed, stealth is one skill as is perception, diplomacy includes gather info, caster level checks used because concentration was eliminated, etc.

Classes: HD is based on BAB, 1/2=d6, 3/4=d8, 1/1=d10

Classes: Casters get unlimited at will cantrips.

Classes: More class features spread across all levels.

Classes: Classes get powerful high level class abilities to encourage sticking with a class as a good option.

Classes: Different progression for prc saves.

Barbarian: Rage done in rounds instead of set time so none wasted.

Bard: music done in rounds.

Cleric: turning = area small healing as default.

Cleric: Only get medium armor as default.

Druids: wildshape reduced.

Monks: Get full BAB when flurrying or grappling.

Rogues: Sneak attack almost everybody, including undead and constructs.

Rogues: Everybody can find traps but rogues get a class bonus at it.

Crafting magic: Does not require xp

Favored Class: It is choice now for everybody and gives bonus +1 hp for each level of class or +1 skill point.

Races: bumped up by giving everybody an extra +2 stat bonus, supposedly to bring them in line with the power of later races such as the ones from Eberron.

Negative levels: get save each day to go away, no more permanent level loss that makes the party different levels.

Great guidelines for monster stats by CR.

 

[Dark Mistress]

This post is two part:

1) The big question: Why Pathfinder? Why do you like playing it as opposed to 4E or 3.5E or another edition of D&D? Why might I like it to? What does it offer that other editions don't? (Besides beautiful books). What are its strengths and weaknesses?

I tried 4e and it wasn't for me. I won't get into the reasons other than to say I didn't think it was a bad game. It just didn't appeal to me. I liked 3.5e a lot but felt it had some problems like most games. Pathfinder addressed many of those problems. Not all and I didn't like all their fixes. But they fixed a lot of what I seen as problems and I liked the vast majority of their fixes. So for me it is a better version of 3.5e.

2) How does Pathfinder differ from 3.5? Please, no long exegesis - just short and simple with key points.

See above mostly, It fixed a lot of problems I felt 3.5 had and made it better. Just my personal opinion of course. The few changes it made I didn't like I can still go back and use the 3.5 version of the rules. So in the end I ended up with a game that fit what I wanted a lot more.

 

[Jason Bulmahn]

Game designers who post on E. N. World.

The Auld Grump

Its true.

I think the folks here are brining up a number of fine points, so I will leave them to it, but I did want to say thanks for giving us a look.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

 

[jasonbostwick]

Typed up a big long post last night and then deleted it midway through when I realised it was just a big wank about why I stopped playing 4E. I'll make this a lot quicker and less negative.

I chose Pathfinder mainly for the adventure support - the Kingmaker AP alone pretty much won me over. I started out on a conversion of the adventures and then realised it would be easier to just run them in their native system, and the more I checked out PF the more I remembered all of the things I loved about 3.5.


I went on to Pathfinder over going back to 3.5 because the revisions basically look like a copy of the houserules I was playing with at the end of the 3.5 era. Condensed skills, extra feats, no 'dead levels.'
The continuing support is also important to me - like others in the thread have said, the APG and GMG are amazing books.



Having made the transition from 4E like you, though, there were a few things that were a bit of a shock.
Going back to monsters that weren't fully contained in their stat-block was a bit hard to deal with, but hasn't been that big of a deal at low levels.
The extensive list of conditions is also harder to keep track of than 4Es, but they come into play a lot less often. I mostly have difficulty remembering what conditions allow the rogue to Sneak Attack, after playing with the much simpler Combat Advantage mechanic for a few years.

 

[minitrue]

As one of the players in Mage Dave's Runelords campaign, will agree it is definitely no easier than 3.5.

First, and this is no slight to 4 ed, it just never felt DnD to me. Tried getting into it when it was first released, but it just never happened.

As for why Pathfinder and not 3.5, well first it's very much supported. No one that I can think of is still putting out 3.5 material, but there is plenty of Pathfinder if I feel I need it, and plenty more on the horizon. Plus, Paizo has show they wanted the fan's input, with a full year of open play test. Sure not everyone is happy with everything that came out of that, but by and large there are more positives than negatives and I like others feel the changes did improve an already very good game engine.

So really more than anything, it's personal taste more than anything else.

 

[Deitus]

Hey,
I played 3.5 and dropped it and RPG's altogether prob 5 years ago. But for the last week or so I've really been itching to play something again. My biggest frustration of 3.5 was the amount of time combat took as levels got higher. A buddy of mine told me he heard Pathfinder took 3.5 and Cleaned it up. I'm liking what i heard up above and was wondering if combat got streamlined any.
Deitus

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Hey,
I played 3.5 and dropped it and RPG's altogether prob 5 years ago. But for the last week or so I've really been itching to play something again. My biggest frustration of 3.5 was the amount of time combat took as levels got higher. A buddy of mine told me he heard Pathfinder took 3.5 and Cleaned it up. I'm liking what i heard up above and was wondering if combat got streamlined any.
Deitus

In all honesty... not as much as you would most likely want. At higher levels, things are always going to slow down as the capacity of characters increases. Fast combats are more about the players actively being quick and being decisive with their actions and effects. The DM who can co-ordinate this all effectively with a very very strong knowledge of the rules will find the changes a benefit (particularly at the high middle levels up to about 11th or 12 level). Speed in combat though will still be reliant upon the rules knowledge and decisiveness of the players and DM.

However, if you are using the adventure paths from Paizo, you will find that most finish well before 20th level with 14th I think being the lowest thus far. As such, the majority of campaigns and time within them should have combats going on at a fast enough clip for most players. YMMV.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Mercurius]

Thanks for all the replies, folks. I don't really have an angle on this or a reason why I'm asking other than simple curiosity. It certainly seems like Pathfinder is a true 3.5 Revised or Improved edition, or just 3.75.

One quick question: One of the things I least liked about 3.5 was the fact that it rewarded system mastery to such a degree and almost encouraged min-maxing and, despite all the options, offered a few tried and true paths towards character maximization. Is Pathfinder similar in this regard?

 

[Herremann the Wise]

One quick question: One of the things I least liked about 3.5 was the fact that it rewarded system mastery to such a degree and almost encouraged min-maxing and, despite all the options, offered a few tried and true paths towards character maximization. Is Pathfinder similar in this regard?

Somewhat but perhaps sufficiently different for you. I think the focus on staying within a single class rather than jumping about cherry picking from (Prestige) classes all over the place goes a certain way to dealing with this. Put simply, if you stay in a particular class, you should have a strong, effective character. I think there will always be character-optimization because such is the nature of complexly put together characters.

However, I feel the necessity of having system mastery to have an enjoyable, effective character is not there, at least at the moment. Obviously if you allow outside material in (particularly psionics) then you will have the dog's breakfast of ridiculously optimized class combinations of 3.5. For the moment though with the Core and Advanced Player's Guide, you have a really nice breadth of options that should produce a fun character for everyone, regadless of their preference of play.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Ebony Dragon]

One of the things I least liked about 3.5 was the fact that it rewarded system mastery to such a degree

Thats actually one of the things I like best about 3.5