Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Empirate" data-source="post: 5854107" data-attributes="member: 78958">The biggest accomplishment of Pathfinder  is the "rebalancing of the classes and closing of loopholes" they were able to use as a marketing ploy, while in actuality deepening and widening the gap between powerful and useless classes even further.Some of the classes got minor little bumps in power compared to 3.5, while others ladle up their newfound power with shovel-sized spoons, but the power curves of class vs. class were horribly set apart, making melee more pathetic than ever, nerfing the Rogue for no reason at all, and making primary casters even better than they used to be.When a sane rules interpretation seems to allow mundanes (like the Monk) to shine too much, it is killed off by errata or developer "rules clarifications". Bye-bye functioning trip, grapple, sunder etc. as a viable fighting style.Pathfinder also rewards sticking with a single class much more than 3.5  did.  So, the triple or quad classed characters are rare today, which is as it should be, since it allows casters to take over the world even more easily, while mundanes struggle even harder to get a useful set of abilities going WITHOUT shooting themselves in the foot in the process.Etc.Have I said I'm really not a fan of the way PF adresses game balance? I love quite a few of their fixes, like the new player races quite a bit, like the skills (except Fly, wtf?), love the presentation/artwork - but the one thing they set out to do, they failed at.Also, the much-vaunted backwards compatibility? Not feelin' it, bro. Not feelin' it.</blockquote>

Verification