The Sweet Spot

[ProfessorCirno]

I think the game is enjoyable from 1-20, more so then 3.5, but the BEST parts, the "sweet spot," is 3-16/18, a big upgrade from where it was before.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I think Pathfinder reduces but does not eliminate problems like "the sweet spot."
If you're worried about your 1st level character not being durable enough, consider taking Toughness as your fist feat. Those extra HP will really help then and it scales so it's a good feat for all 20 levels.

 

[Somebloke]

I asked a similar question (concerning the pathfinder rogue and their utility at higher levels- actual game experiences) and it would seem that people have not yet reached that far.

 

[Glade Riven]

You don't seem to be particularly confident that Pathfinder will hold up at higher levels...

Saying 'Well, you gotta fix it yourself' or 'Go, play 4e' doesn't sound promising.

It's not just about the characters, either. It's the high-level monsters, as well. I don't have the Pathfinder bestiary (yet), so I don't know what changes have been made to them.

Anyway, let's see some actual game reports!

Yes, I'm working on a campaign setting for Pathfinder just 'cause I find it inferior (just being a little sarcastic).

I like 4e, I like Pathfinder; I'm just sayin' some choices can affect the "sweet spot," and if someone makes some bad choices (or even some non-min/max choices - there's a difference), that could shrink it. 4e limits the ability to make some of those choices, but that leads to other issues. Again, I like both - just for different reasons.

I bought the beastery, and the higher-end monsters look like they are a little easier to handle, at least, than their 3.5 equivelent. And the Tarrasque is one nasty crazy D&D version of Godzilla (as it should be). Monster selection is rather light for CR 15 and above, but nothing obvious in what I've glanced at shows up as an issue. With how Pathfinder fleshed out some of the higher level stuff in classes, for the most part it's probably fine. But, again, I havn't playtested it.

 

[Noir le Lotus]

I've played my 1st session of Pathfinder ths week end (Everflame). Party of 4 (barbarian/fighter/bard/cleric), lots of fun !!

Skills are great, and we al apreciate some changes to classes : Bard song and Barbarian rage in rounds make those 2 classes more interesting and durable (if the fights are short of course). Channel Energy is really good, too bad the dwarven cleric only has 8 charisma.

We didn't used yet CMD and CMB.

I wouldn't say that the sweet spot begins at 1st level ; some opponents are really dangerous and can lay down any 1st level character in a single blow (orcs are really nasty !!).

For me, sweet spot is 2-9.

 

[bouncyhead]

We've switched our various old 3.5 stuff to PF - Rappan Athuk, playing at about 6th, Rise of the Runelords (started with Beta) (5th), an adaptation of Slavelords (8th) and my homebrew (15th). As has been observed before, the class buffs and the channelling makes 1st and 2nd much more fun. We had got into the habit of starting at 3rd under 3.5. Scaling improvements with feats (e.g. toughness) work well.

As for the 15th level stuff... there's no denying that things get more fiddly - bonuses, durations, spell effects etc. are all still there but we did all feel that things were smoother and speedier. CMB/CMD means less page-flicking. Not sure quite why but conditions seem easier to admin. One other thing - the index! Want to look up a rule? The index will ACTUALLY HAVE THE REFERENCE, right there where you would expect.

Is the spot still sweet at 15th? - I'm not so sure. Less sour perhaps! My (lazy) take is as always: It's all up to the DM. I have always thought of D&D (and other rulesets) as toolkits (Heroic Fantasy Adventure - some assembly required) with no presumption of 'balance' or 'sweetness at all levels - guaranteed!' written in. It takes a certain level of (readily acquireable) skill to create balanced, fluid play. Clearly the core rules can make that easier or more diffcult but PFRPG, 3.5, 4E, whatever - 80% is in the hands of the person behind the screen.

 

[Jhaelen]

As for the 15th level stuff... there's no denying that things get more fiddly - bonuses, durations, spell effects etc. are all still there but we did all feel that things were smoother and speedier. CMB/CMD means less page-flicking. Not sure quite why but conditions seem easier to admin. One other thing - the index! Want to look up a rule? The index will ACTUALLY HAVE THE REFERENCE, right there where you would expect.

Is the spot still sweet at 15th? - I'm not so sure. Less sour perhaps!

Thanks for posting! The main reason I am so interested in this is that I'm currently still playing 3.5 and the party's effective level is currently 15. I'm still enjoying the game and so do my players, but it sure has become a lot more fiddly. So, in a way, I'm glad the campaign is nearing its end.

After doing some playtesting most of players are looking forward to switching to 4e. A minority, however, would prefer staying with 3.5. So, I'm looking options right now to accomodate both sides to some degree, and Pathfinder might figure into that.

For example, I've not yet played the Shackled City AP, and after reading the book, I'm unsure if it would translate well into 4e. I think, I'd rather use 3.5 or Pathfinder for it.
The latter might be the better option here, since SCAP looks quite difficult, so the increased power level would surely help. It's probably also easier to adapt.

There's another argument speaking for Pathfinder right now: It's available in German and apparently supplements will continue to be translated. 4e currently doesn't have a German publisher.

Luckily, there's still some time before I have to decide on anything. So, keep posting those play reports, please!

 

[Dredan]

Pathfinder characters are definately more powerful than standard 3.5 characters. 3.5 only has 7 feats at 20th level straight up, not including human and class bonuses, you tack on a Pathfinder feats, it shows a difference starting at 5th level, and is more evident at 10-15. We are playing 15-20 atm and it is definately noticeable. I enjoy the system and it allows your characters to have a little bit more lasting power. Or it just means the DM/GM throws bigger badder baddies to mess with your life. I am still a believer in the old school save or die theme that encompassed alot of 2nd, 3rd and 3.5. Pathfinder definately cleaned up some things that caused many a tabletop arguement.

 

[MerrikCale]

Certainly, the sweet spot of the PFRPG is of a lower level that 3.5

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Have played up to about 8th level now along with a one-off at 16th level. So far the full campaign seems great. No one felt bored playing low level, and the enjoyment has remained the same as we have leveled.



The high level game felt like the same twink-accountants dream that it did in a 3.5 game. This of course is always worse in a one-off but nothing I saw made me think I will enjoy a campaign at this level. Too much stuff, too much dice, when the average bonus is almost twice the D20 roll it gets old fast.

Just my opinion.