I'll say it again.
Those LOOOOOOOOOOOONG ears on elves look so bad!
Am I the only one who thinks so?

- deemshy

I like the long ears and the eyes. It makes elves stand out more and not just humans with small points.

The ears are a bit too "Poison Elves" for my liking. But that's about the only thing I don't like about 3.P! :-)

As a fan of Record of Lodoss War, I like long eared elves.

But then look at Merisiel and you realize that not all Pathfinder elves have to have long ears. :)

At last, I had the time to give the newest version close scrutiny...

Everything looks pretty fine, artwork is great, layout and text organisation are better than in the original 3.5 PHB (even though it´s only Alpha!).

BUT: My overall impression is that the rules design yields to the dark lure of power-gaming - Look at the incredible bard of foe-negation, the cleric of endless healing... to mention only a few.

I could make a lot of suggestions in detail, but they all tend into the same direction: More is not always better.
Too many feat choices and too many special abilities tend to blur the distinctions between characters. What´s the difference between Fighter A and Fighter B, when both know almost all feats and therefore don´t have to develop their personal style of fighting?

It´s not that I like weak characters... I´m not only GM, but also a player :-)

having only read the alfa 1 information, i like what i see. the balance of character progression is smooth, where other systems you are lucky to survive you first three encounters. as much as player death is a reality, it dosnt need to be a random occurence. the races feel strong where before they felt like a hollow mash of numbers.

KS

It seems awsome my GM is planning to switch us over after we're done with this mod but when is it going on sale as an actual book?

It seems awsome my GM is planning to switch us over after we're done with this mod but when is it going on sale as an actual book?

The beta releases as an actual book this August. The final product will come out August 2009.

It seems awsome my GM is planning to switch us over after we're done with this mod but when is it going on sale as an actual book?

The Beta is being released as a softcover in August 2008.

Edit: D'oh! Gninja'ed by Master Mike!

Thanks

good work. Hopefully, this will keep 3.5 alive as i hate the mechanic of 4th, but there are still a few things that may be used

up to now, i see a couple interesting things, but mainly in the characters, some mechanics that needed reviews are still yet to be updated.

I like :

The simplified skills system from 4th edition is well adapated here(anybody other than me ever found ridiculous to succeed move silently and totally miss hide ? Its too many dices. The skill system is not too different from 3.5 wich make the adaptation playable.

the favored class mechanic (xp cost, very not user friendly in a D&D campaign when you want all players to progress equally. Better give a little bonus related to the favored class. Now its a hp bonus (as per 4th i think), but it can be skill bonus or anything similar.

Some classes needed more options. This could have been the results of class books like the WOTC "complete" series (when they started the "alternate class features" trend, but since WOTC dropped 3rd edition, its good to have some updates here. More colorful options, nothing munchkin, like domain powers for the cleric wich give a little bit more taste. Some class really needed a updage, like the fighter. I still dont understand why bards have no trap sense or evasion, but no word is perfect. The rogue sneak them all including undead, less sure about that, a sneak need to have some weakness, otherwise.... And on the races, at last, more than one option for favored class (why does a faithful race as the dward had to be fighters ?) But this is something a simple campaign rule could have solve. And on the races, i agree on one thing : why more bonus ? And why humans can choose a weapon ? But the half-elf definitly needed a little upgrade.

The positive/negative energy channeling, interesting chance, simplier, leaving the "control/rebuke" undead to the spell list. Really a better mechanic.

the cover rule is a little bit more user friendly.

what still need to be worked on :

- the xp cost mechanic ; most dm prefer giving same xp to all player, so when one start to "spend" his xp, problem start. The idea of creating a magic item is to invest oneself in it. cost in gold is ok for a base, but replacing the xp cost into gold value, i dont find this satifying and its too simple (otherwise, lets just buy it). something like temporary ability points, temporary level or anything like that would seem better.

- mecanics adaptation of some rules. I see the grapple rule still fragile.

- the xp mechanic never been user friendly since 3rd edition (before, fix xp, now...) and it still need some work. In 4th edition, i like the fact they try to give more options for non combat xp, this can be adapted, like the skill challenge xp from 4th

- the layout of the product. I hope the final version will have better layout. We have to read small box to understand that this or that give this or that bonus to hp, etc.

Most of the improvement have been done on character development, but now, its time to work on the game mechanic itself.... Good work

I love the alpha version. It has done so much for the balancing 3.5 and especially the Fighter that I have to give it 5 stars. I'm sure there will be some small things that will be found via play testing that will need to be changed or revised but you are definitely on the right track.

Thank god for Paizo. I was worried D&DINO would be all we had left. Thankfully someone will still support the REAL game.

I could make a lot of suggestions in detail, but they all tend into the same direction: More is not always better.

Too many feat choices and too many special abilities tend to blur the distinctions between characters. What´s the difference between Fighter A and Fighter B, when both know almost all feats and therefore don´t have to develop their personal style of fighting?

Hm, with all the splatbooks for 3.5 out, I find it difficult for even a pure fighter to have all the feats I want to get. Let alone for classes with less feats. At least the fighter can specialize for two different fighting styles. Maybe three.

I think this's way better than mpdify almost everything like the D&D4E will do.
The sorcerer finally has come to have some powers from it so called bloodline(I think this's the REAL sorcerer, not the one from 3.5).
So, I think that Pathfinder RPG is the better choice to the ones who still wish to play the D&D without going to the 4E.

Excellent revision of the 3 to 3.5 rules thus-far; most of the changes are pragmatic and sensible. An excellent start for refugees from 4th edition like myself.

I would not mind seeing other Classes such as what first comes to mind -- the Battle Dancer not only to be included, but beefed up more to go now toe toe, to, toe, with the Monks in the Martial Arts aspects of the game.

In addition await to see what is to be done with the Binder especially...

In addition await to see what is to be done with the Binder especially...

The Binder is not open content, so it will not be converted (on an official basis, anyway)

I like the premise of what you're doing and the adjustments (from what I can tell so far anyway) to the classes. But a few classes, IMHO, are still hurting in one specific area - and some in a few areas.

First off, skill points. Who made the genius decision waaaay back when 3.0 was being developed that the educated Cleric and Wizard (the latter are among the "most educated and well-learned scholars of the fantasy world") should have the fewest skill points possible while the commoner NPC (who is often illiterate) should have more; as does the illiterate Barbarian PC class!? That makes absolutely NO SENSE!

As if it's not bad enough that the Wizard gets the worst of nearly everything statistically (as did the Sorcerer), you cut them off at the knees in skill points so it's not uncommon for the illiterate Barbarian to have more knowledge skills with ranks (or higher ranks) than the great educated scholar?!

And Wizards really need something more. I mean, come on... I know they they can get some mean spells later on but those are NOT without drawbacks already (limited numbers of them they can use per day, restricted from wearing armor (almost entirely), sometimes they take more than what is prudent or exceptionally useful amounts of time to cast, they require components often, etc), so why not give them something to help counter the fact they get next to nothing in the way of class abilities (since most classes get something practically every level (if not literally every level)). They get the worst hit die, the worst skill points, two bad saves, worst base attack progression, and have next to nothing in the way of class features or additional feats granted by the class to make it seem more balanced. Maybe some class feature that lets them gain bonus ranks in Knowledge skills every so many levels - so the "scholarly wizard" will actually have some scholarly knowledge. It'd be small and not affect much in the way of balancing the classes - and it'd allow the Wizard with their pathetic 2 points to focus on things that are of critical importance (like Concentration, Spellcraft, Knowledge Arcana, etc) without being less educated than the illiterate masses.

First off, skill points. Who made the genius decision waaaay back when 3.0 was being developed that the educated Cleric and Wizard (the latter are among the "most educated and well-learned scholars of the fantasy world") should have the fewest skill points possible while the commoner NPC (who is often illiterate) should have more; as does the illiterate Barbarian PC class!? That makes absolutely NO SENSE!

As if it's not bad enough that the Wizard gets the worst of nearly everything statistically (as did the Sorcerer), you cut them off at the knees in skill points so it's not uncommon for the illiterate Barbarian to have more knowledge skills with ranks (or higher ranks) than the great educated scholar?!

Well, a wizard's high INT should compensate for a low number of skill points. The balance of skill points is that if you gain new spells every level from first, you have the fewest possible skills. (I guess this isn't true for a bard, but their limited spell list is the balance there.) The sorcerer and cleric do get the short end of this stick, though, as they tend to make INT a dump stat. Then again, if they want more skills, they shouldn't use it as such.

Folks,

Comments on the mechanics aren't going to be seen by the appropriate people here. Please post them in the Pathfinder RPG Playtest Feedback Forum.

i just started building my first pathfinder char. the rules, i think, are good (far better than wizards' 3.5.) i do have one problem with the format of the rule book though. did anyone else notice that the page numbers are all on the wrong side? the even numbers should be on the right, but they are on the left, and the odd numbers should be on the left, but they are on the right. this meens that you either have to get creative about the way you print it out, or you can leave it and have your page numbers on the the inside of the page near the spine instead of on the outside of the page near the edge like they should be. i hope THAT gets fixed for beta... lol

i just started building my first pathfinder char. the rules, i think, are good (far better than wizards' 3.5.) i do have one problem with the format of the rule book though. did anyone else notice that the page numbers are all on the wrong side? the even numbers should be on the right, but they are on the left, and the odd numbers should be on the left, but they are on the right. this meens that you either have to get creative about the way you print it out, or you can leave it and have your page numbers on the the inside of the page near the spine instead of on the outside of the page near the edge like they should be. i hope THAT gets fixed for beta... lol

I actually think in the printer friendly version, they just needed to add another blank page after the title page and before the table of contents, then the number would be on the correct side. Since I've order the printed bound version of the beta, I'm not really worried about this issue. Actually, at least 75% of my current group has either pre-ordered the printed bound Beta or has stated they will buy the printed bound Beta.

you can leave it and have your page numbers on the the inside of the page near the spine instead of on the outside of the page near the edge like they should be. i hope THAT gets fixed for beta... lol

Print the cover (Page 1) then print the rest of the book duplexed starting at page 2. The back side of the cover page should be blank.

Very interesting. It certainly increases the power scales, but not unreasonably given the increased scope in the rest of the 3.5 rules. It up-guns the fighter nicely, and removes some of the more broken rules and ideas. What it doesn't address are some of the known 'broken' class features, like the Druid's wildshape and the 'CoDzilla' question in general.

I have a question about Manyshot and Rapid Shot. The way they are worded seems to suggest that the two can be stacked.

Allowing for you to make shoot two arrows with the first shot of a rapid shot.

For instance, a 6th level ranger with an 18 dex could fire four arrows in a round at +8(two arrows)/+8/+3. Is this true or am I missing something.

Absolutely fantastic that someone has done this. 4e is not for me, and Paizos release attempts to build on 3e in a gradual and conservative manner.

I have only skimmed the rules once, but will be looking more closely in a few days.

• Not sure about introducing points systems for Barbarians, but will need to see how it pans out.

• Like the skill system revisions; the only thing I might have done differently there was to have skill 'groups' like acrobatics, then allow DMs at the campaign level to support specific skill instances (like 'jump') so that a person could take 'acrobatics' and concentrate on 'jump' if they (and the DM) really wanted to. But, overall, its a great refinement to the anarchic skill system.
  

Only thing I would ask (beg, even) is do not be tempted to follow the 4e model where *everything* is a special power that can only be used /day /encounter etc. AFAICT, you haven't so far -- with the possible exception of Barbarians. Need to look into it.

That said, I think that there may be a place for points systems being used more widely (eg. casters as well as barbs - in a clerics case it might allow Cure Minor to be a cantrip again). At least with points you allow the possibility of resting quickly to get a few back.

Overall, and 8/10 with bonus points for (a) evolving not polymorphing the system, (b) seeking feedback very early in the process, and (c) (apparently) listening to feed back.

Cautionary note: take a lesson from the open source community: release it when it's ready, not when some pre-ordained schedule dictates. Have Beta1, Beta2....etc then RC1....

Commercial Suggestion: Let me pay my $50 now for the unreleased product and allow me to download all the Betas and RCs...then take your time.

Prayer: Hire some escrow lawyers to release the entire system under OGL if you abandon it and/or get taken over by morons. And commit to releasing your 1e version under OGL when you release 2e.

Folks,

Comments on the mechanics and such aren't going to be seen by the appropriate people here. Please post them in the Pathfinder RPG Playtest Feedback Forum.

Prayer: Hire some escrow lawyers to release the entire system under OGL if you abandon it and/or get taken over by morons. And commit to releasing your 1e version under OGL when you release 2e.

I don't think I understand what you mean with this, but everything is currently being released under the OGL, so every iteration from Alpha 1 to the final is and will remain open forever. If you meant something else, can you extrapolate on it?

this is shaping up to be what i had hoped 4e would be. 4e isnt the game i wanna play, no judgment just a fact, everything they said about it made since until the product came out, i like my 3.5e and like some complication/choice in how i play my character. thanks for fixing the game i love

love how u fixed the skill point system tho i hope u finish cleaning up/combining the skills (swim fly climb=athletics something like that) love what u did with the fighter dont usually play one but might now the hit dice system is better i prefer that characters get thier con score added at first lvl, wish u would do something about the paladins mount being temporary. I think u fixed the cantrips nicely as they're usfull but not worth tracking but what I LOVE MOST SO FAR IS THE CHANNELING SYSTEM its brilliant and how i always wanted my healer class to be dont its the perfect system dont change it or i might hate you (j/k) good work guys liking it so far planning on reading the rest soon and giving an update

another skill fix would be the diplomacy and intimidate do you really need 2 skills to do the same thing. Something i like about 4e that i think would be great is the whole ritual setup makes sense to put all the spells that have alot of set up time and arent used in combat as just a ritual that uses spellcraft instead of spell slots to use. i like where your going with the whole staves thing but i wish you could just make an implement that boost my spellcasting and maybe scales with my level. also i kinda of like how the 4e weapons where fixed giving the weapons more diversity maybe u could do something like that with out over simplifing them like 4e does.

This is a very solid book even as its looking. This is exactly what 4th edition COULD have been if they weren't trying to compete with the mmorpgs. People played those to play THOSE. People played D&D to play D&D. They totally missed the spirit of the game and Paizo seems to have taken it back up again. Thanks guys ... as far as I'm concerned you guys are D&D now.

As a side note, I would STRONGLY recommend either getting rid of Sundering or fixing that broken system. Its cheap as heck. An uber strong barbarian or berserker or maybe even fighter could break the equiv of a +10 weapon with very little trouble and that 500,000 + weapon is gone, something the player worked their asses off for.

I would strongly suggest perhaps sundering causing damage to a weapon to make it do like -5 to hit and damage until repaired or something, not entirely destroyed and worthless forever.

Could we perhaps get a "printer friendly" version of the DL? I think that's a small thing to ask, as the DL is free already. I bought the book, but I certainly will NOT require my players to put out $25 each for a book that will be replaced in one year.

Thanks ahead of time.

My players and myself are so enthused by Pathfinder that we ordered 3 print copies. That's $47 worth of postage alone. Serves us right for living in England.

Still better than forking out anything for 4e though.

Where do you go to actaully download the Pathfinder Beta release, I go to my downloads, I click on the BookCover jpg that says Pathfinder Beta and I get brought back to this page, where is the actaul PDF file to down load?

Any help most welcomed!

Where do you go to actaully download the Pathfinder Beta release, I go to my downloads, I click on the BookCover jpg that says Pathfinder Beta and I get brought back to this page, where is the actaul PDF file to down load?

Any help most welcomed!

Click on the link below the jpg that says Personalize this file.

After a few seconds, a link will load below that that you can click on to download the Beta PDF.

Thanks Rauol_Duke, I got it now, the link wasn't comming up, thanks for your help.

Paizo rocks for putting together this excellent revision of 3.5. I am downloading the rules and will very likely spring for the final version. I am unbelievably psyched to be able to avoid 4e!

Ok is good

Paizo rocks for putting together this excellent revision of 3.5. I am downloading the rules and will very likely spring for the final version. I am unbelievably psyched to be able to avoid 4e!

My sentiments exactly! I ran about 1/2 way through Keep on the Shadowfell and came to the conclusion that 4e has a completely different feel than 3.x. Thank you Paizo for keeping the spirit of the game alive.

oh, and Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting rocks, by the way... :)

oh, and Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting rocks, by the way... :)

Yep, have to agree with you there - the campaign setting is pretty damn awesome; and I've read numerous campaign settings over the years. It's got plenty of depth, great characters, interesting history, and the promise of so much to come. Excellent work.

However, as this messageboard is about the Beta Release, I want to put in my 2 cents worth, which echoes many other's sentiments.

Don't like 4e. Tried it, wanted to like it...but didn't. Completely different feel than 3.5 - but now the Pathfinder game has well and truly kept that alive and I wish to thank Paizo for the great job. Can't wait for the final product. Have downloaded both versions, and when it is finished everyone at my gaming table is going to purchase a hardback.

Can't wait :)

I just heard about Pathfinder recently from my DM (he was sick of me ranting about 4th edition).

So it was with GREAT delight that I discovered this "3.75 edition" and what I looked through is very good.

I am really looking forward to see what more you'll publish to sate my hunger.

thank you very much for your "3.75 edition", I love it so far!

Welcome aboard kyoni