Anyone playing Pathfinder?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Null

Null

I know a lot of people weren't thrilled about D&D 4E, and if there's anyone still looking for solid new material for 3.5 compatible, there's the Pathfinder RPG from Paizo, which is a 3.75 so to speak. It keeps the same basic structure of 3rd Edition but is upgraded across the board. That's right, Bards and Monks are no longer useless, and Paladins are now downright dangerous to the toughest of Big Bad Evils.

It's also the system I've been doing work for, but that's for another post.
 
K

Kitty Sinatra

I've been playing a medieval World of Darkness recently, instead. I find it's working out way better than 4th edition, and it's a nice change from 3rd. If I went back to D&D, I'd prefer to just stick with 3.5. I don't want to bother with the feeling that I'd have to convert a bunch of material - like the classes from the splatboooks - to fit the feel of PF.

Some of the Pathfinder stuff is kind of interesting, but I just can't see bothering with it.
 
Covar

Covar

Gruebeard said:
I've been playing a medieval World of Darkness recently, instead. I find it's working out way better than 4th edition, and it's a nice change from 3rd. If I went back to D&D, I'd prefer to just stick with 3.5. I don't want to bother with the feeling that I'd have to convert a bunch of material - like the classes from the splatboooks - to fit the feel of PF.

Some of the Pathfinder stuff is kind of interesting, but I just can't see bothering with it.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong, but I don't believe you would have to actively convert things from 3.5 to Pathfinder.

My friends are playing a Pathfinder game, they seem to enjoy it. Biggest plus I heard was that it is worth playing a base class all the way to 20 now.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

Haven't played any non-computer rpg, but from what i saw non-core classes might be underpowered compared to Pathfinder's versions of the core classes... that's what he might be referring to.
 
Covar

Covar

Yea that was one of the biggest changes they wanted to make with Pathfinder. Prestige Classes are mostly compatible (some old skills are gone or changed, so they made a table to convert the prereqs), and I don't believe you need to make changes to the monsters. I know Paizo has worked hard to make Pathfinder highly compatible with 3.5 to capitalize on that market.
 
Null

Null

Well, the recently released bestiary has taken a lot of classic monsters, and some new, and made it into a complete core book on par with, or better than, the Monstrous Manual. It's not a conversion so much as it is a re-imagining.

The reason I ask is because I've been working for a third-party publisher making OGL supplements compatible with the PFRPG. The publisher is 4 Winds Fantasy Gaming and we're just about to release our third book, Paths of Power, available now for preorder and released on November 27th. The previous two books are the Book of Arcane Magic: A Sourcebook for Bards, Sorcerors & Wizards; and the Book of Divine Magic: A Sourcebook for Clerics, Druids, Paladins & Rangers.
 
K

Kitty Sinatra

@Li3n said:
Haven't played any non-computer rpg, but from what i saw non-core classes might be underpowered compared to Pathfinder's versions of the core classes... that's what he might be referring to.[/QUOTE
Yeah, that's what I was referring to. But then they've also gone and changed how some feats work - Cleave, for example - and there are some things that will affect.

It ultimately just seems like a whackload of minor rule changes that really wouldn't make the game more enjoyable for me. (I don't care about taking a class to 20th level since I doubt I'd ever gonna take a character past 12th)
Click to expand...
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

Well unless you're a stickler for balance you probably could ignore the small changes and just use the improved core classes, they seem like they'd be fun to use with all the options...
 
K

Kitty Sinatra

@Li3n said:
Well unless you're a stickler for balance you probably could ignore the small changes and just use the improved core classes, they seem like they'd be fun to use with all the options...
Click to expand...
yeah, but it's really just a matter of "why bother?" . . . . not that Book of 9 Swords or Tome of Magic are balanced anyway.

Anyway, I don't want to bog down this thread with my preferences here so lets just kinda skip on past this and get talking about Pathfidner, eh?
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

Gruebeard;297783][quote=@Li3n said:
Well unless you're a stickler for balance you probably could ignore the small changes and just use the improved core classes, they seem like they'd be fun to use with all the options...
Click to expand...
yeah, but it's really just a matter of "why bother?" . . . . [/QUOTE]

Because the extra stuff each class gets sounds awesome...
 
Null

Null

@Li3n;298281][quote=Gruebeard;297783][quote=@Li3n said:
Well unless you're a stickler for balance you probably could ignore the small changes and just use the improved core classes, they seem like they'd be fun to use with all the options...
Click to expand...
yeah, but it's really just a matter of "why bother?" . . . . [/QUOTE]

Because the extra stuff each class gets sounds awesome...[/QUOTE]

Oh, it totally is. Monks' Flurry of Hits actually works now, too (I know it was unofficially referred to as 'Flurry of Miss' in 3.5). Sorcerors now use "Bloodlines" - supernatural influences in their heritage, that are the source of their arcane spark. In addition to their spellcasting abilities, Sorcerors get a number of bonuses - skills, extra spells, bonus feats, bloodline arcana, and powers. Wizards aren't much different than usual, but they get a lot more for specializing. Rogue, Rangers, and Barbarians get a lot of new abilities, and Paladins go from fairly underpowered to devestating against Evil undead, outsiders, and dragons - Smite Evil now ignores DR, does normal damage, plus paladin level, plus charisma bonus, then doubled.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Thread necro. I just got done turning in my 4e stuff. I got Warhammer RPG in trade. It's blowing my mind. So I went today and got Pathfinder & the Bestiary.

LB, I'llbe speaking with you about your products soon.
 
@Li3n

@Li3n

BTW, in Pathfinder are the Wiz and Sorc still useless in combat once they run out of spells, or do the at-wills help with that?
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
I guess. Jesus Christ. I could have kept my 3.5 books, taken a magic marker to a few pages and called it Pathfinder.

I'm not complaining but the differences are so small you have to hunt for them!
 
M

Mr. Lawface

It was meant to be compatible with 3.5. That means it can't be very different.
 
K

Kitty Sinatra

Dave said:
HOW DID THESE GUYS NOT GET SUED?!?
Click to expand...
Allen said:
Open Gaming License
Click to expand...
Indeed. Dave, did you never see the Warcraft RPG? Or Arcana Evolved by Monte Cook (one of the 3 guys who wrote 3rd edition)?

They, too, were essentially 3.5 with minor changes. There were several others that I can't bring to mind at the moment, too. And Mongoose even republished pocket versions of the 3 core books.

The Open Gaming License was a sweet idea.
 
Frank

Frank

Pathfinder is written far better than the 3.5 books are though. The information is laid out better, the graphs and charts and examples given are fantastic for explaining stuff to new players than the 3.5 stuff ever was too.
 
K

Kitty Sinatra

Considering they had an excellent foundation to build on - 3rd edition D&D is leaps and bounds above the competition - it would be a failure if it wasn't at least as good; and it shouldn't be surprising that they improved on it while building upon its foundation.

And if you're actually criticizing 3.5's presentation and organization, you should read the World of Darkness books. That stuff is pretty, but it's a bugger to find what you're looking for in them.
 
Frank

Frank

I'm just talking from a standpoint of trying to teach people who've never played D&D before (almost everyone I played with last time, only myself and the DM out of 7 of us had ever opened up a D&D book). Pathfinder was definitely a headache saver.

I wasn't really trying to criticize 3.5 as much as I was trying to talk up Pathfinder. It's nice to have an all in one DMG and PH.
 
Covar

Covar

I built my first Pathfinder Paladin. Much like 4e the layout of the book is miles above 3.5. I also really liked how they changed the skills. It's simpler and more powerful at the same time. I don't get to play until next week, but I'll let you know how it goes. Loving the change so far.
 
D

Deschain

I learned everything from d20, have never actually read the PHB or DMG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top