Pathfinder 1E What's so good/bad about Pathfinder?

[tylermalan]

I started with AD&D when I was around 10 or 12, but didn't play it "correctly" - we didn't really follow the rules the way they were meant to be played. I start doing that with 3E, and transitioned into 3.5 with my friends in high school. I played that a lot, until 4E came out, when I switched. I played 4E for about a year and a half before switching to Pathfinder.

So, for me, Pathfinder is a "better" version of 3.5, and I've come to realize that 3E is the edition that feels like D&D to me. It provides the customization that I want available as a player and that inspires me as a DM...

...and Pathfinder just takes that and makes it better. I really feel like I can make ANYTHING out of the options presented by Pathfinder. All of the classes are interesting. The newer stuff from the APG is unique and interesting. Combat maneuvers are more streamlined. You only need one (thick) book to play it. There is a LOT of 3rd party material for 3E that you can use/update for Pathfinder.

 

[Bacris]

Background: I'm a 1e, 2e, then 10yr break, then 4e player. Pathfinder players, tell me what you love about your game? Does anything annoy you?

I've played AD&D 2nd Ed, 3.0, 3.5, Pathfinder, and 4E.

For me, Pathfinder lets me make the character concept I want - especially, as mentioned, with the introduction of Archetypes, even being able to use multiple archetypes for one character.

Before the APG and all that came out, I just liked that it felt like D&D, but had some good changes made (skill list streamlining, combat maneuver simplification, size bonus standardization, etc). I will never claim it's perfect, but it plays the way I like to play.

I am not a fan of Vancian / slot-based abilities, which is why I prefer psionics over spellcasting. Pathfinder has a lot of character options that do not use slot-based mechanics at all, and that's something that I very much prefer.

 

[concerro]

I'm interested what things about Pathfinder would entice you back to the 5e WOTC fold, and what things about Pathfinder would you leave behind?

Nothing about PF would make me want to play 5E. If I do play 5E it has nothing to do with PF.
If I could fix something about PF it is the number of dice rolls. One thing I do like about 5E is that if you have an ability score of X some things are automatic.

What I like about PF. It kept the things I liked about 3.5, and they give me quality adventures to run. I also get to talk to the designers of the game online, and even if they don't do what we ask them to do I know they are listening.

It is somewhat rules heavy. That does not bother me since I am good at picking things up, but making it a little easier would be nice for the more casual gamer.

 

[Lwaxy]

3. Too many skills.

How so? Skills were significantly reduced and made easier.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Background: I'm a 1e, 2e, then 10yr break, then 4e player. Pathfinder players, tell me what you love about your game? Does anything annoy you?

Please don't turn this into a things I hate about 4e bagfest!! I'm interested what things about Pathfinder would entice you back to the 5e WOTC fold, and what things about Pathfinder would you leave behind?

What do I love about Pathfinder?
I like that it's still basically the 3.5 framework that is highly customizable and usable with most of my huge library of 3.5 material. It's much easier to subtract what I dont want in my game than to add or build it myself. There are so many 3.5 subsystems that I can pretty much customize my game anyway that I want to.

As an AP subscriber from the beginning I love the adventure support. Even if it's an AP that I have no intentions of running wholesale (Second Darkness, Legacy of Fire, Serpent Skull....) I can pillage the hell out of it for maps, NPC's and even individual encounters. There are whole towns, cities and adventure sites that I can use.

I like that the world of Golarion is fleshed out via the adventures and not so much a novel line. This way there's no players going "Well, It didnt happen like that. In [insert book name here] that charactere died" or "that city was destroyed" Not in our adventure it wasnt...

I can tell you what used to annoy me about Pathfinder, it was doing NPC / Monster Statblocks by hand. But then I just started to cut and paste from PDF's of the AP's and books and that made my life easier as I'd simply excise the things I wasnt going to use and make changes that I needed to.

Then I got the Pathfinder for HERO LAB and that pretty much sorted everything else out.

There is NOTHING that will make me leave Pathfinder short of several colossal blunders by the Paizo crew. I've been off the WOTC teat for about 4 years now and have no desire to go back. 5e would have to not only be a phenomenal ruleset but also allow me to easily use all of my 3x and Pathfinder material to run a game in it the way I'd like. And personally I dont see that happening.

Would I try 5E without investing anything in it? Sure. But there definitely wont be a repeat of 2008 when my level headedness and willingness to give 4E a fair shot resulted in my buying the 4E gift set from Amazon using it to run a few sessions of 4E and then never using it again. Now I only support games that I KNOW that I'm going to be running or playing in no matter who cool they may be.

 

[Lwaxy]

Pathfinder players, tell me what you love about your game? Does anything annoy you?

Simplified skill system, archetypes, the (mostly) compatibility with my 3/3.5 stuff, as it is basically 3.75. Combat maneuvers are easier to deal with, too.

Yes, in theory, too many feats. Doesn't matter though, as I usually allow for extra feats and 3rd party material anyway but try to cut down on the types of feats causing headaches in calculating fights This is the same as it was in 3.5 anyway.

I'm interested what things about Pathfinder would entice you back to the 5e WOTC fold, and what things about Pathfinder would you leave behind?

There is nothing that would "entice me back." If I was to pick up 5e, which is very well possible, then it would be for flavor and additional stuff to incorporate into my house rules.

The game we play is really neither here nor there anyway, as we house ruled so many things it is more an ever expanding extra version. As it should be, I think, as every group likes and needs different things.

5e seems to want to do a lot of things we already do for a while, so it would probably come down to collecting one more line. But not dropping PF.

 

[gamerprinter]

I'm interested what things about Pathfinder would entice you back to the 5e WOTC fold, and what things about Pathfinder would you leave behind?

Nothing would entice me to 5e WOTC, and I don't plan to leave Pathfinder behind, so this question is a non-starter.

I don't hate 4e, but I don't like it either, not my game, although there is nothing wrong with it.

All this 5e hype is doing nothing for me, but wishing it was released already, so I didn't have to hear the hype anymore. I currently do not make posts in the 4e forum, and really wish 5e was in it's own forum, so I didn't have to see anything about it on the general forum. I would only see it if I chose to visit a 5e forum - for the time being, I don't have that choice.

 

[kitsune9]

How so? Skills were significantly reduced and made easier.

For my own personal preference, I like fantasy games to have less than 20. For more modern or toolkit style games that I like to play, more's the better.

 

[SensoryThought]

One thing I hear a lot about from 3.5/Pathfinder is the ability to create highly customizable characters compared with other editions.

What specifically do you find makes this work so well? Feats, a large range of classes, prestige classes, the multiclassing system, all of the above, or something else?

 

[gamerprinter]

One thing I hear a lot about from 3.5/Pathfinder is the ability to create highly customizable characters compared with other editions.

What specifically do you find makes this work so well? Feats, a large range of classes, prestige classes, the multiclassing system, all of the above, or something else?

For Pathfinder, from the APG, archetypes are a great way to customize base classes, not only using the list of available archetypes, but understanding the mechanics of archetypes allowing you to create your own archetypes to fit themes that currently don't exist.

In 3e, much of the attention went to Prestige Classes, and the various qualifying multiclass dips necessary to best use PrC.

To my preference, Pathfinder has made other options better choices. While Prestige Classes still exist, they have been nerfed somewhat to not outdo the base classes. Archetypes allow you to manipulate the class features of base classes to customize without the need for multiclassing, nor ever needing a prestige class.

Archetypes also point to alternate classes which are either complete modifcations of an existing base class, or a nearly scratch built class.

While feats, skills, and spells for casting casting classes help differentiate 3x/PF from other editions, archetypes and alternates form the major adjustable components for customization in PF, more than anything else.