I thought it would be instructive to contrast the features of 4e, Pathfinder (Alpha 1.x), and the 3.5 SRD. It's the sort of silly thing we do here at work when trying to select an external vendor for a project. (Managers like "decision/action" matrixes. It lets them feel like they understand something.)
The entries in the table are mine... but I thought it might make a useful talking point for a discussion of *why* to choose one version over another... and provide some useful contrast for the development team for Pathfinder.
Feature | 4e | Alpha | 3.5
_____________________________________________________________________
Skill system | Hate it | Hate it | needs minor work
1st Level Power Level | Hate it | Ok | Like it
Overall Power Level | Hate it | Ok | Like it
Default Playstyle | Hate it | Like it | Like it
Core Races | Hate it | Good | Like it
3.5 Core Compatibility | Very Poor | Poor | reference level
Expanded Compatibility | Poor | Ok | reference level
(Compatible with content/ideas from recent splatbooks?)
Core Completeness | Poor | Good | Good
(Provides all needed elements and support for play?)
As my answers would indicate, there is no chance I'll be switching to 4e...
But the switch to Pathfinder for me is also not obvious. I really don't like giving up skill points/ranks. And with that comes concerns for me about compatibility with older 3.5 rules. (I build a lot of characters that *don't* max out skills...)
I have mild concerns that there is "power creep" across the board in Pathfinder. Not to the levels of 4e, but nonetheless, it's another area where Pathfinder isn't really on the compatibility page with 3.5.
It would be really interesting to see what categories other people would choose to rate/differentiate these systems and what they like/dislike about these things.
|
I have mild concerns that there is "power creep" across the board in Pathfinder. Not to the levels of 4e, but nonetheless, it's another area where Pathfinder isn't really on the compatibility page with 3.5.
I understand the concerns. However, I am plesed so far that the original core classes are getting comparable "upgrade" to some of the newer core classes that were nerfing them. *cough*Warlock*cough*
My take on Pathfinder in comparision...
Feature - 4e | Alpha | 3.5
Skill system - Hate it * Needs work, but better * Needs Work
1st Level Power Level - Hate it * Like it so far * Like it
Overall Power Level - Hate it * Ok * Like it
Default Playstyle - Hate it * Like it * Like it
Core Races - Hate it * Improvement * Like it
3.5 Core Compatibility - Impossible * Good * (Default)
Expanded Compatibility - Impossible * Ok * (Default)
(Compatible with content/ideas from recent splatbooks?)
Core Completeness - Poor * Needs Work (It's still in testing!)* Good
While the skill system does need work, I think it is headed in the right direction. As a DM, I understand the desire to speed NPC creation. As a player, I like the options to customize too. I feel that the consolidation of certain skill sets is the right move.
I also think that comparing 1st level power is hard to judge... how many sessions does a player take to advance to 2nd level? A comparison of low level play is probably more appropriate. Either way, my answers stand.