|
Is there a handy list of talking points or highlights to help players quickly read and understand the benefits of Pathfinder and major changes from 3.5?
* It's a living game. 3.5 is dead as far as WotC is concerned, and no new material for it will appear.
* PFRPG is produced by one of the best companies in the business, long known for their high quality and outstanding customer support (OK Paizo, where's that store discount ?)
* It will have a wide third party support (it already has - SORD, TOS, Q-workshop dice, minis...)
* It fixes some of the long standing 3.5 ruleset problems, chiefly combat maneuvers, undead turning and polymorph
* The skill system is streamlined and much easier for use both for the GM and the players
* Core classes are revised, giving them new exciting options and fixing some issues
* It retains a very high degree of backwards compatibility with 3.5 supplements. Adaptation requires little or none work.
Is there a handy list of talking points or highlights to help players quickly read and understand the benefits of Pathfinder and major changes from 3.5?...
* Core classes are revised, giving them new exciting options and fixing some issues.
On this one you might make it a more active conversation, and ask them what their favorite class was, or even favorite build (i.e. multi-class). Anyone who says "two levels of Fighter" you've got :) ("Why just two levels, with Armor & Weapon Training they now...")
On a conceptual level, PF is what the 3.5 revision perhaps should have been. Same game, fully improved.
Grapple is simple now. If that doesn't get 3.5 players over, nothing will :D
|
I have never had any trouble with Grapple. Not making fun of anyone who did, I just don't see the problem. However, I like that PathFinder is a slightly different game. So far, it looks to me that they are trting to do a little more with things making sense than "just because that's what we want the rules to be", for the most part anyway. I also like that (it feels like this anyway), I can contribute to makeing the game into what I would like to see it be.
Some of the highlights for me are that:
Each class now has more to it. They are not just straight copies from 3.5 PHB by any account. I have collected practically every issue of Dragon since 3.0, and many Dungeons, and a lot of the optional rules in there I liked, are core. For example the sorcerer bloodlines.
The fact that, at the moment, it is free should go a long way. . .
There are a few things I personally do not like, particularly Spellcraft as Concentration and the Fly skill, but easy fixes for me, I say this because that is practically all I don't really like as of yet.
There are a lot of good, new feats, though if you really loved some feats like Cleave, you may be a little put off until you see what it now really does.
Pali's are a lot better, though I think the could stand to get a little something else. Same for Clerics, in a different fashion.
* It's a living game. 3.5 is dead as far as WotC is concerned, and no new material for it will appear.* PFRPG is produced by one of the best companies in the business, long known for their high quality and outstanding customer support (OK Paizo, where's that store discount ?)
* It will have a wide third party support (it already has - SORD, TOS, Q-workshop dice, minis...)
These 3 really make the point for me. 4th edition is such a massive change to the game system that it's (in my view) a completely different game. If you like the 3.5 style of play then you can either try to buy the increasingly more expensive and difficult to find 3.5 core books on Ebay, or you can move to Pathfinder and play a system that is alive and well and has a great company producing high quality modules and adventure paths for it.
Honestly, look at the quality of their modules. Download D0 or D1.5 for a free example. I did and I went out and purchased D1 and D4 because the quality of the writing and design was so good. (Then I bought the guide to Darkmoon Vale as well. My local game shop now knows me by first name.)
Plus, we have TONS of d20 material out there that's totally usable with Pathfinder. Sure, 4e says it's compatible with d20. But how compatible is a previous 3.5/d20 module with 4e when 4e characters have double the hit points, everyone has half a dozen or more healing surges , and wizards can cast magic missile spells every single round?
Look at the Classic Dungeon Crawl series. There are dozens of classic AD&D style old school adventures that are completely Pathfinder compatible.
So I see it this way: If you want to play a 3.5 type system instead of a 4e type of system then you'll want to play something that is well supported, alive and well. Pathfinder is your best choice in that situation. And as a nice side effect, you also get a cleaner system than the 3.5 core books. It's a win-win.
|
For me it is simple...
1. This is the game you already know and love. The name has changes as has the company providing the frontline support. But no need to learn something new or trash your library of 3.0/3.5 stuff.
2. The frontline support is second to none. The Paizo staff is active on the message boards and the consumers of the game have a real chance to influence what sort of game it is by beiong able to communicate derictly with Paizo on these message boards.
Fate IS ironic - a minute after that post I got the Holiday Discount e-mail from Paizo. ;-)
* PFRPG is produced by one of the best companies in the business, long known for their high quality and outstanding customer support (OK Paizo, where's that store discount ?)
or they read your post
|
|
These suggestions are helpful. I think my players are most interested in changes to classes, combat and PC creation. I'd like to crystallize things for them like:
1. Favored Classes
2. CMB
3. Lack of multiclass restrictions.One specific question for Beckett:
"There are a few things I personally do not like, particularly Spellcraft as Concentration and the Fly skill, but easy fixes for me, I say this because that is practically all I don't really like as of yet."
Did you fix this by adding Concentration (INT) as its own skill?
As far as I know, they probably will. Seems to me that there are to many people complaining that A.) it favores Wizards to much, and B.) there are to many options that use Concentration (Tome of Battle, Psionics, other), that have nothing to do with magic. I don't work for them, so no inside scoop or anything.
I want to convince them its worth it for them to download the beta and commit to it.
They can just download and see for themselves. No need to commit at all.
Of course, it's likely that once they have downloaded it and read it, they will want to commit all by themselves. I think it will take no longer than the middle of the skills section.
2. The frontline support is second to none. The Paizo staff is active on the message boards and the consumers of the game have a real chance to influence what sort of game it is by being able to communicate directly with Paizo on these message boards.
Depends on who the consumer is. I think it's been perfectly well proven that anyone who talked about 3.5's real problems was ignored or smacked down, while people who debated which barely noticeable small number to give a class or how much more powerful than fighters druids should be (not whether or not they should be, how much more so), were listened to.
I think it's been perfectly well proven that anyone who talked about 3.5's real problems was ignored or smacked down...
It's also been perfectly well proven that Paizo intends Pathfinder to be 3.5 with a few tweaks, not an overhaul of the entire system. Since "3.5's real problems" are endemic, they are beyond the scope of Pathfinder.
Depends on who the consumer is. I think it's been perfectly well proven that anyone who talked about 3.5's real problems was ignored or smacked down, while people who debated which barely noticeable small number to give a class or how much more powerful than fighters druids should be (not whether or not they should be, how much more so), were listened to.
Bah. I see several big problems fixed. Some more are, indeed, endemic, so pathfinder cannot fix them in this version, since it's a 3e revision, not a new edition.
|
Depends on who the consumer is. I think it's been perfectly well proven that anyone who talked about 3.5's real problems was ignored or smacked down, while people who debated which barely noticeable small number to give a class or how much more powerful than fighters druids should be (not whether or not they should be, how much more so), were listened to.
I think we're making some headway. Not as much as some would like, but in the end it is going to be 3.x, not something really very different. I guess they might have been clearer to some, so that people (Frank T, for example) understood what the aim really was, but I don't think that the aim was "fix most of/all 3.5's problems" even though it appeared to some that that was the aim.
Finally, of course, plenty of people don't think 3.5 has that many problems; that's fine, although of course it's annoying when the people that do have problems with it are dismissed by the former as somehow not role-playing properly. Of course, when the people with problems tell those without that they don't know what they're doing, that's also irritating. The difference, it seems to me, is that the people with problems with 3.5 are mostly* discussing mechanics and the people without problems are mostly* discussing their play/game experience, both of which are entirely legitimate points of view but the relationship between them is so hard to pin down that conversations between the two camps on game design tend to go nowhere, fast and eventually angrily.
*But not entirely. This isn't supposed to be a rigid dichotomy, it's just how the preponderances seem distributed, to me.
All of the above are great reasons, and I want to reiterate Paizo's high quality work.
Here are a few small things that got my players really excited about Pathfinder:
- Sorcerous bloodlines in the core book! No more being the Wizard's good-looking brother.
- Crafting magical items no longer requires XP.
- Feats are cool again.
- That massive library you've been collecting for over five years is still good.
I have noticed that a large number of suggestions that are ignored are those suggestions that would radically change something. The key to PFRPG is it is supposed to remain compatible with 3.5e. Radical changes would make this difficult to impossible. Right now, a few hit points, feats, and basic skill realignment pretty much convert older material for use. Too big of a change means major work for DMs & pretty much bypasses the intention of the design.
|
|
Every single Class has been altered in some way. Rogues, still get the same Sneak Attack, but they also get a lot more of the Special Attcks, and a few bonus feat options. Wizards and Sorcerers pretty much lose a spell per spell level and gain a lot of very unique powers instead, based off of individual Class choices. Paladins are awesome. Barbarians keep everything they had in 3.5 and also gain these little short term bursts almost like psionics (mechanically, not themed). As I understand, Monks are an exception that is in need of some work.
In addition to that, a lot of skills are combined, and with the way cross-class skills work, it is difficult to maintain a skill or two almost as high as maxed out class skills.
Another change is the way Trip/Grapple/Disarm/Sunder and similar things work. You have a CMB score. You roll d20 + Str + CMB +/- Size, against a straight D.C. to accomplish whichever you attempt. Personally, I had no trouble with 3.5's way, but I don't mind this one either.
I like some of the new feats, and I dislike how some feats are changed, but it is not set in stone just yet. "2,000 ways how to not make a lightbulb, and all that".
All in all, there are a large amount of changes, all over the place. Many are just in how the basic game works, and not out in the open.
|
The difficult thing about that is 'what does backwards compatibility mean?'
No one really knows. Sometimes it gets used to deny a change, sometimes not.
My definition? If I can look at a adventure stat block, and use the numbers in it to run an encounter.
I don't need to increase HP, or change skills. I don't need to add new class features either. As long as the NPC still works, it's backwards compatible.
Which to me means, there aren't a lot of changes that CAN'T be made due to BC.
Sure, new DMs may be asking 'Why isn't this guy the same as all the rest?' But really, is he going to be using 3.5 stuff? And if he is, won't he know about the changes?
Gnomes are playable and aren't crappy.
Elves are actually good at magic.
Fighters aren't the bottom of the barrel anymore.
Sorcerers aren't wizards for people that don't know how to manage lots of spells anymore.
Is there a handy list of talking points or highlights to help players quickly read and understand the benefits of Pathfinder and major changes from 3.5?
Biggest benefit: everyone gets to buy a new PHB