Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tigris" data-source="post: 9851649" data-attributes="member: 7043270">Pathfinder 1 to Pathfinder 2 is for me a huge downgrade: PF1 (coming from 3.5 of course) has so many cool classes, so many crazy ideas, and PF2 feels overbalanced and boring to me in comparison. Too stingy (getting +1 or +2 as bonuses is just not interesting), not heroic with all the action and feat tax. D&D 3.5 was an upgrade since it is not a different game. I think it had good improvement overall and I liked some of the late 3.5 classes which were more experimental. The martials of the book of 9 swords especially.D&D 5.24 is overall also an upgrade of 5E. Still far from perfect, but reintroducing more D&D 4e mechanics made martial classes, especially the fighter, better again and more fun. Weapon mastery (also not being perfect) for me alone would be an upgrade but there are some more. Sure it may also had some strange decisions which I also not like, but making level 3 the official starting level (similar to 4Es level 1), and increasing the power floor of martials (and in general of not multiclassing characters) is a good direction.(D&D 4E is a different game, even the lead designer said that was the goal, and I agree. Its still D&D but different enough from 3.5 to not feel like an upgrade. (Pure game not simulation) Similar to 13th age again (lead designers of 3E and 4E) is a different game overall even if its also D&D (narrative game)). The Dark Eye 5 compared to The Dark Eye 3 (I never looked into 4) also feels like an upgrade just because the complexity is a lot more bearable. I think people did not like it compared to 4E, because it did not release with all options etc. but well thats to be expected. I think it still could need A LOT MORE streamlining than what they did, but well one has to start somewhere.</blockquote>

Verification