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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gamerprinter" data-source="post: 5904450" data-attributes="member: 50895">Why play any other edition, than Pathfinder, is my question? I too have played every edition up to 3.5, and while I enjoyed 3.5, after a year+ playing Pathfinder, I never want to play 3.5 again - PF is it's default upgraded replacement, IMO. It's the same, only better. Going from a Pathfinder Bard, Ranger, Paladin, Fighter, Monk, Rogue, and Sorcerer to a 3.5 version is only disappointment. And of the new classes, I love the Magus, Inquisitor, Oracle, Cavalier, Anti-paladin, and Samurai, and there are no effective 3.5 versions of those great classes. Due to Combat Maneuvers as handled in Pathfinder, now my players eagerly attempt to grapple, when because of the opposing rolls, and the complex nature of 3.5 Combat Maneuvers it was avoided if at all possible. Haunts, a great mechanic, though could easily be used in a 3.5 game. While I like the nerfing of most of the Save or Die spells, and the consolidation of skills, most of the rest is only minor adjustments to the game and not particularly compelling one way or the other for me. I prefer Pathfinder so much, in fact, that it's the first 'edition' that has compelled me to publish something of my own, as in my <a href="http://paizo.com/store/byCompany/r/ritePublishing/pathfinderRPG/kaidan" target="_blank">Kaidan</a> setting. While others above talk about Pathfinder APs, which I think is a good thing, I don't personally need it, as I homebrew almost entirely, and always have - so I don't really need Golarian, nor the APs (although they are good material). For what it's worth, you can keep 4e, D&DNext, and whatever might come after that away from my table. I'm not even slightly interested.</blockquote>

Verification