I play in a group that uses all of the 3.5 material available (including Dragon Mags). As a result switching over to Pathfinder would need to be pretty seamless with all of these sources for it to be a very viable choice for us.
So, how compatable would you say the new rules are with ALL the material that is out there for 3.5 (at least all the WotC licensed stuff)? I know it was stated design goal, but I get the feeling that the compatability is more on the lines of picking up an AP and still using 3.5 stuff for all the PCs.
Sean Mahoney
Creative Director
|
I play in a group that uses all of the 3.5 material available (including Dragon Mags). As a result switching over to Pathfinder would need to be pretty seamless with all of these sources for it to be a very viable choice for us.
So, how compatable would you say the new rules are with ALL the material that is out there for 3.5 (at least all the WotC licensed stuff)? I know it was stated design goal, but I get the feeling that the compatability is more on the lines of picking up an AP and still using 3.5 stuff for all the PCs.
Sean Mahoney
If you're using all 3.5 material, you're probably already pretty skilled at house ruling areas where the rules don't fit together perfectly. Switching to PFRPG shouldn't cause too much of a problem as a result. I've been using material from 3.5 in Pathfinder Adventure Paths based on the PFRPG and it works pretty smooth.
If you are talking about adventures, monsters, non-major NPCs, then most of the "updating" can be done on the fly.
1- combine listen/spot/search into perception
2- add some skill points
3- add some hit points
4- add a feat or two
Major NPCs and monsters can be done on the fly also, but I find for BBEGs and their immediate high level henchmen that it is worth taking the time to "Pathfinderize" them.
As far as PCs, their will be some conversion material posted. Mostly the same kinds of things.
1- combing skills
2- adding feats
3- adding hit points
-- david
Papa.DRB
I guess I am asking more about what issues the players will face. For example, if a player gets it in their mind to play a Master of Many Forms, will this work? Will the PrC require significant reworking? What about something like a PrC focused on grappling? What about feats that add to certain things? Can I take a feat that gives a +4 to disarm? If so, how does that work? Is there some sort of conversion guide?
Some feats and PRC's will take some looking at. Some will work with ease. I would say look at each one and give it a once over.
Oh on PRC's recall that the skills requirement is -3 from what it was in 3.5 and the +3 class bounes does not count toward that
Oh on PRC's recall that the skills requirement is -3 from what it was in 3.5 and the +3 class bounes does not count toward that
I am a little confused by this since I don't actually know the PRPG rules yet (waiting for the actual product... I didn't want to learn the rules just to have them change on release, so I am waiting). However, if I am understanding you correctly, you are saying that because there are no longer ranks that are spent on skills that you subtract 3 from the requirement and that is the class level required of a class which has that skill as a class skill? How does that work with multiclassing?
Sean Mahoney
Some feats and PRC's will take some looking at. Some will work with ease. I would say look at each one and give it a once over.
Yikes... at last count there was something like 1700 feats to go over!!!
Sean
I guess I am asking more about what issues the players will face. For example, if a player gets it in their mind to play a Master of Many Forms, will this work? Will the PrC require significant reworking? What about something like a PrC focused on grappling? What about feats that add to certain things? Can I take a feat that gives a +4 to disarm? If so, how does that work? Is there some sort of conversion guide?
PrCs will require some rework, but not much.
Some skills were combined.
perception = spot/listen/search
stealth =move silently/hide in shadows
acrobatics = jump?/something else
Since you do NOT get the 4x skill points at first level, entry into a PrC based on skills changed (reduced number of ranks required).
Grappling is now CMB (Combat Maneuver Bonus), and there are feats such as Improved Disarm to help.
A "conversion" guide is supposed to be posted once the final rules are available.
For right now, download the Beta rules (*knowing* that things have changed in the final), and you can get a flavor of the skills and feats. Most (all?) of them are the same between Beta and Final.
-- david
Papa.DRB
well what I do is allow just a few books. It's like 3.0 to 3.5 some feats worked as is, others did not feat with out a bit of work.
What is master of many forms from? I know the name. If it shapshifts it would fall under the new rules for such and would change
Master of Many Forms - Complete Adventurer
Requirements:
Feats: Alertness, Endurance
Special: Wild shape class feature.
Both feats are in the Beta and it would surprise the heck outta me if they were not in the Final, so lets assume you can get into the PrC.
All the class features look to be portable just as is into Pathfinder. As DM, I would go over with the player the new Druid Wild shape rules and let him/her rebuild the character if needed. The big thing is that wild shape uses the character stats as base, so you can't just have an 8 strength and expect to have a 30 strength bear shape at some point. The spells add to your base stats.
The spells are in the Beta, so you could take a look at what is currently there.
Also, the Beta is a free download, or you could view it online at either of these two websites:
d20pfsrd
pfogc
-- david
Papa.DRB
|
It's hard to tell without us actually having a rulebook yet. That comes in August.
It should be very easy though, adjust a hit die type, move some skill requirements and then go. I'm sure there will be a few that will be marginalized, and Master of Many Forms might be one of them given how they've changed/improved the shape changing rules for the game.
Still those classes will just take a bit more work is all.
well what I do is allow just a few books. It's like 3.0 to 3.5 some feats worked as is, others did not feat with out a bit of work.
Yeah, I know a lot of people enjoy the game better with limits on what is allowed, and that is fine. It just isn't what my group enjoys, and my own personal ethos as a DM is allowing them to play what they want to... they only control their character in my game and I feel like an ass if I am limiting them more than is necessary.
It this type of limitation were required, it would mean that I would need to sell PRPG to them as a different game from D&D 3.5, which means the field is open to any game, like 4E as to us it would be the same in forms of compatability. (Different strokes for different folks and all that)
What is master of many forms from? I know the name. If it shapshifts it would fall under the new rules for such and would change
It is from the Complete Adventurer. Basically it allows wild shaping into a variety of different creature types greatly expanded from what the druid can do (for example, at 1st lvl MoMF gets Humanoid as an option as well as the ability to speak in any form they are shapeshifted into).
Sean Mahoney
Yeah, I know a lot of people enjoy the game better with limits on what is allowed, and that is fine...
...If this type of limitation were required, it would mean that I would need to sell PRPG to them as a different game from D&D 3.5, which means the field is open to any game, like 4E as to us it would be the same in forms of compatability. (Different strokes for different folks and all that)
master of many forms?It is from the Complete Adventurer. Basically it allows wild shaping into a variety of different creature types greatly expanded from what the druid can do (for example, at 1st lvl MoMF gets Humanoid as an option as well as the ability to speak in any form they are shapeshifted into)
Okay woah woah Sean :) I think we're overloading you with minute details here.
#1 - (That everyone keeps saying) You should be able to run any 3.0/3.5 adventure in PFRPG with no trouble at all. That tells you a lot.
#2 - PCs: 90%+ will be *highly* compatible. The remaining 5-10% will require "looking at", to make sure nothing quirky happens.
For instance, feats that burn "Turn Undead" uses (commonly chosen by Paladins) might be *under* powered as they read, because Paladins have a different resource mix to give them those uses (now called Channel Energy). So you might tweak that.
As someone said, Master of Many Forms still works rather well, *in spite* of significant changes to wild shape. The Key thing to remember is simply that the core has changed up a bit, so do one quick check back when something deals with that (like Master of Many Forms and Wildshape). That will tell you if it's the same, different, or better.
[And for the record, *yes* there are still skill points in the game :), it'll be clear when you read about skills what everyone was trying to say.]
Hey if ya want to allow everything cool, just look at the feats they pick and say yes or no or let me rework this. Good chance ya was doing this anyhow
will go look at MoMf
After looking over it, It will work easy..but you will have to model the new types off the shapechange spells. But yeah easily doable
|
The biggest changes are to Polymorph/Wild Shape and Turn Undead, I think
Basically: Polymorph now provides bonuses rather than changing your ability scores. It also only gives you certain abilities rather than all of them. Finally, the Polymorph spell was broken in dozens of spells to turn into various creature types (Beast Shape, Dragon Shape, etc) at various levels. Higher level spells give more options, larger range of sizes and higher bonues. MoMF will require a bit of work to readjust but the concept is solid inside Pathfinder.
Turn Undead got changed to Channel Energy. This ability allows you to either heal everyone within 30 ft or damage undead (or the reverse for what used to be Rebuke undead). The ability to Turn or Rebuke is now a feat that adds on to this (we believe).
Some skills (like Spot/Listen and Move Silently/Hide have been consolidated. There is also a new Fly skill for aerial acrobatics. also, at first level you no longer get 4* skill points, just skill points. However, you now get a +3 bonus on any class skill you have ranks in to compensate. Additionally, cross-class skills cost the same as class skills, they just don't get the +3 bonus.
The hit dice of various classes (Sorcerer, Ranger, Bard, Rogue, Wizard) have been modified upwards. Some classes have gained a lot of abilities (Sorcerer Bloodlines). Some spells have been changed. Most save or dies have been reduced in power. So have several of the most abused Cleric buff spells.
Grappling/Disarming/Sundering have been rolled up into one simpler mechanic, the Combat Maneouvre Bonus (CMB).
But it's 90% the same and the other 10% is probably mutable enogu to survive.
|
It really depends on what the players are playing, to be honest. Backgrounds will likly need to be changed around some too.
Your clerics may wish to just go paladin.
Fighters, rangers, monks, rogues, and barbarians are likely to just change a little here and there, while clerics*, wizards, sorcerers, bards, and druids are more likely to rebuild up from level one.
Many spells will likely change dramatically, so characters and npc's that focus on certain spells may need major changes or dm ruling that they have some unique ability.
As far as using material, a great deal of it is either useless or needs some heavy modification. The things that need modified shouldn't be difficult once you understand pathfinder. The ones that are useless are just useless. Pathfinder has, (and likely will more when the final version is out) made many feats, spells, class features, etc. . . Just not work. Either they are just part of the normal rules, or the entire concept they are based on no longer applies.
Most of the divine feats probably fit into this group, though pathfinder might have their own versions later.
As for past adventures, hard to say. If they are skill heavy rogue adventures, should only need a little mod. If they are undead heavy, then you will need to multiply monsters by like x5 or so. (Maybe, waiting for final). If they are just general, than I concure with what has been said, most can slide on by, but big events you should really look at first.
Another viewpoint.
So the real answer to your question Sean is, "It depends on who you ask." :)
Dear Sean Mahoney,
You know what, don't worry about it. Backwards compatablity should, in theory, mean foward compatablity. So when you get the final rules set, look it over, find the things that most effect your group. Then play a Pathfinder Adv. with the new rule set. Most likely 80% of the conversion issues will come up when playing old 3.5 rules in a 3P game. Then have your players do a conversion or start new charactes. By that point you, as the DM of that Adv. should know what to warn them about.
As to other party stuff, classes are the only thing I'd worry about not so much due to compatablity, but to powercreep, and updating the class' you like and let into your game.
Issues such as Feats, Prc. and just about everyting else, the issues will come up in play. Fix them as you go along, heck most DM's do that even without conversion worries.
Hope this helps a little.
TTFN DRE
PS oh yeah, for God sakes don't ever forget the rule of 1, that's really important.
PPS, uhh, just in case, Rule of 1: In the end it's your game, don't like a rule, or updated rule, thne change it, keep the old one, or just chuck it out the window (example I'm keeping the old skill list, but using new skill mechanics).
|
|
I think the Pathfinder will still be pretty usable with 3.0/3.5/3rd party stuff. I think there will be varying degrees of updating needing done, and some things just will not work. That's not always a bad thing, though. Sometimes old feats don't apply anymore, because what the benefit was is not just allowed normally. Sometimes, the game just doesn't work on any similar concept, so a feat like Empowered Turning, (sacrificing max HD turned for more lower HD), well Channel Energy is completely different concept, not based on HD.
So, it does sort of depend on who you ask. But the truth is, none of us knows yet how Pathfinder 3.0 is actually going to be. It isn't out yet. It might work a great deal better with older materials than the Beta does.
What is the focus of your campaign? If every player in your group concentrated on the funky munky splatbook PrC classes, you might not find much in Pathfinder to appeal to you.
The focus of the campaign is a very different thing than what books are allowed. For example, we are enjoying having them all available for character builds right now but are playing through Rise of the Runelords.
Backwards compatibility is kind of a fudgy statement. In the strictist sense, Pathfinder's Backwards Compatibility refers to their own 3.5 modules published under the Pathfinder banner to date. That's where they are most compatible.
The original stated intent was that you wouldn't have your shelf full of 3.5 books invalidated. My worry is that it came close to happening anyway.
When it comes to all of the splatbooks out there with over 720 prestige classes then things get wooly. Paizo had very different ideas on where to take the game then WOTC did when the latter was churning out splatbooks by the month, frequently with relatively little checks for balance. And it gets worse with other 3rd party stuff such as what Mongoose would cough up, not to mention Spell Compendium.
This is completely a side note, but the things I have to rule out as broken or adjust are almost always Paizo things from when they were producing Dragon magazine. I find the statement kind of funny that Paizo is the balanced one and WotC had little interest in balance. That said, Paizo had some crazy tight deadlines for Dragon and couldn't go through thorough testing for everything, and hiring people off of the Character Optimization boards just to ask "how would you abuse this" isn't a very feasible thing for a business. I have always seen Paizo as focused on the story, not balance.
As for the other comments, as I said we don't allow third party books unless officially licensed. It seems strange to claim the Spell Compendium is a problem when all it did was collect spells (and in MANY cases make them less powerful), I don't think the balancing factor of spells was that you had to search through a lot of books to find them.
What you would have to ask yourself is what are you looking for in Pathfinder that you don't have already. Then you'll get a better idea if the conversions and other decisions you need to make are worth the effort.
What I am looking for is the continued ability to purchase and use the Pathfinder adventure paths with as little conversion work as possible. I want to continue to allow my players to use the huge amounts of 3.5 books they have invested in, but I can't spend a tremendous amount of time working on conversion.
If either of those things are going to take much work then I likely will look at switching to running the APs in 4E. If either way I need to do a bunch of conversion work, then I really do like a lot of the design ideas in 4E and that is likely where I would have to spend the very considerable amount of time on conversion.
All that said, I REALLY like Paizo and their products. Either way I will continue buying their adventures and APs. The question for me is if my group will also be spending their gaming dollars on Pathfinder RPG stuff.
Sean Mahoney
Well, I think what I have taken away from this discussion is that I will trust Paizo enough to drop my money on purchasing the book when it comes out, but I will not encourage my players to do so. I will then take the time to review it thoroughly and determine how much adaptation would really need to be done for someone who has (and uses) shelves full of 3.5 stuff. If I am looking at a lot of work, then I will likely not continue buying any of the crunch related Paizo products and will just look at the APs and adventures which will then be converted either back to 3.5 or to 4E deciding on what my group decides to do. (If it is convert back to 3.5, I am not sure where my players will keep spending their RPG money).
Sean Mahoney
|
|
Well, I think what I have taken away from this discussion is that I will trust Paizo enough to drop my money on purchasing the book when it comes out, but I will not encourage my players to do so. I will then take the time to review it thoroughly and determine how much adaptation would really need to be done for someone who has (and uses) shelves full of 3.5 stuff. If I am looking at a lot of work, then I will likely not continue buying any of the crunch related Paizo products and will just look at the APs and adventures which will then be converted either back to 3.5 or to 4E deciding on what my group decides to do. (If it is convert back to 3.5, I am not sure where my players will keep spending their RPG money).
Sean Mahoney
Sean,
Don't forget that you can get the pdf for $10. If you're not sure, that might be a better starting option.
I had a guy walk up to the PFS game I was running yesterday, asking about Pathfinder, because his friends told him to check it out. I showed him the Beta and he said, "This reads just like 3.5!"
I just said, "That's the point." :)
|
|
One thing that I'm hopeful of, in terms of backwards compatibility, is that some Pathfinder fan with too much time on his/her hands will actually convert over a bunch of prestige classes (modifying pre-reqs and making certain that the class features still make sense with the changes to the system.
It doesn't seem like it would be very difficult to do for any given prestige class, but there are an awful lot of them.
Umm, volunteers...?
One thing that I'm hopeful of, in terms of backwards compatibility, is that some Pathfinder fan with too much time on his/her hands will actually convert over a bunch of prestige classes (modifying pre-reqs and making certain that the class features still make sense with the changes to the system.
It doesn't seem like it would be very difficult to do for any given prestige class, but there are an awful lot of them.
Umm, volunteers...?
The problem with that is that a lot of them are not OGL. That means WoTC can fire off a C&D (Cease and Desist) order at any time if you post it online. Now, they usually don't bother. But, considering PfRPG is their primary competitor (whether they realize it yet or not), I would expect them down the road to start firing off stuff C&D's over stuff they don't bother with right now.
If you don't believe me, try to buy a 3.5 PDF anywhere on the net. Can't be done. WoTC stopped all sales of 3.5 PDF's anywhere with C&D's.
<Stuff about it being IP of WOTC><Stuff about people converting Prestige Classes.>
Umm, volunteers...?
I had a mini-inspiration about this actually. If you convert the class and do *not* list it, and only list the "change the prereq's to: ..." parts and "replace this power with this text here: ...", you're not posting any IP except perhaps the power name.
And even that could be avoided with "the 2nd level power" or something like that if truly necessary.
For instance, here is Eldritch Knight:
Hit Die: d10
Requirements - same except as follows:
Base Attack Bonus: +4
Spells: Able to cast 2nd-level spells.
Saving Throws: Good Fort progression (+1 at 1st and every two beyond (3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th)), Poor Reflex and Will progression (+1 at 2nd and every third beyond (5th, 8th)).
Class Skills
The eldritch knight’s class skills (and the key ability
for each skill) are Climb (Str), Knowledge (arcana) (Int),
Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Ride
(Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Spellcraft (Int), and Swim (Str).
Skill Points at Each Level: 2 + Int modifier.
Special abilities:
1st level - Changed - Bonus feat: May now choose any feat labeled as a combat feat, and may choose an additional feat at 5th and 9th.
1st level - New - Diverse Training: An eldritch knight adds his level to any levels of fighter he might have for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats. He also adds his level to any levels in an arcane spellcasting class for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites for feats.
10th level - New - Spell Critical (Su): Whenever an eldritch knight successfully confirms a critical hit, he can cast a spell as a swift action. The spell must include the target of the attack as one of its targets or in its area of effect. Casting this spell does not provoke an attack of opportunity. The caster must still meet all of the spell’s components and must roll for arcane spell failure if necessary.
It seems from reading some of the Beta and the final previews, that Pathfinder RPG increases the character power level at each and every level. Now if all the big bad guys are characters, that doesn't seem to be a problem, but most are monsters.
It seems with the big increase in power, PF is not backwards compatible with the 5 or 6 monster books, and all the adventures that were written. At least not without a lot of work.
The combat and skill rules seem to be OK to convert on the fly and basically backwards compatible, but not the power level.
-Swiftbrook.
|
Creative Director
|
Increasing power to the PCs is not as big a problem as it sounds, especially since this increase is front-loaded. As in, it's intended, partially, to make lower level characters more stable and longer-lasting.
Another reason for this is to address the "15-minute day" problem, in which some characters are either so fragile or so limited in their resources that they can only participate in one or two or three encounters before they have to rest. By making PCs able to last longer (as in, increased hit points and better racial modifiers) and by giving classes with limited resources more options (most spellcaster classes), there's less of a reason to fall into the 15-minute day trap.
|
|
Not to derail things, but is 3.5 compatible with 3.5?
The number of just freakishly, horribly broken bits that arose from the sea of various books has caused me to be far less worried about PF. The number of times I've had a clever character grab a combination of WOTC-book feats and PRCs and end up with Galactus is staggering.
That's where for me the concern falls apart...it LOOKS like, at least, the closer to a vanilla/core book only 3.5 game you're running, the less jarring PFRPG will be....and the more splat books and expansions you add, sure you increase the risk of issues with PF, but you also increase the risk of issues with the core game.
excellent - I can confirm these suspicions through years of playtesting...
It seems from reading some of the Beta and the final previews, that Pathfinder RPG increases the character power level at each and every level. Now if all the big bad guys are characters, that doesn't seem to be a problem, but most are monsters.
It seems with the big increase in power, PF is not backwards compatible with the 5 or 6 monster books, and all the adventures that were written. At least not without a lot of work.
The combat and skill rules seem to be OK to convert on the fly and basically backwards compatible, but not the power level.
-Swiftbrook.
The power level of monsters is likely to increase as well (i.e. the number of feats they recieve based on their hit dice, etc.) in addition to the power increase of class leveled "monsters". Effectively (imo) they are balancing the core classes *and* the monsters against the power creep in splatbook classes. Of course, we'll see how it works... if they want more poweful player characters vs. the monsters that will be more difficult for me to adapt to. Personally I thought 3.x characters were definitely harder to kill than previous edition characters anyway.
In short, there is going to some "updating" work for older adventures material. Quite a bit for me, I have a 34 year old campaign to work over... of course there are areas that haven't been touched since 1st edition AD&D and probably won't be unless my characters take that turn in the road :D
|
|
There are some elegant choices in the way encounters are built in Pathfinder Role-playing game. I've game mastered more than 50 sessions now, including Alpha 1, Alpha 2, and the Beta Playtest of Pathfinder.
Given that the final release, just days away, is dialed even more toward backward compatibility, I'm confident we'll see that James, Jason, et.al. will have found the "sweet spot" of refinement with strong and easy compatibility with v.3.5.
I agree wholly with the front-loaded power of new characters, and have found the enhancements a boon to gamemasters like myself who do throw a lot at PCs, especially at the lower levels.
I will also briefly add that as a gamemaster - I regularly - every few sessions or so, ...regularly drain the party COMPLETELY, just to get a complete sense of just how long it takes to run down a healthy balanced party. For those who have not tried this.... try running a "24" style adventure, wherein, the party never gets to rest. They just keep going and going, week session after week session for what amounts to the longest friggin day on earth.
There must be a lot of myths circulating, imho, about the v.3.5 15 minute adventuring day.... a good GM, using a variety of encounters shouldn't run into that problem. And with the adjustments in Pathfinder, I'm 100% confident that they never will.
-Pax-
This seems to be a good place to ask this question. I understand why they changed Wildshape and Polymorph in general. I played a Master of Many Forms before and yeah, he was rediculous. A ton of work but extraordinarily powerful if you are willing to do it.
What I don't understand is why they felt the need to change Turning and Rebuking Undead. What was broken about this? Adding healing or damage to this seems way more broken than what Clerics used to have.
An evil Cleric with 20 CHA (best starting) can effectively drop a half/half+1 fireball at her feet 8 times per day except...
* It doesn't hurt her or her allies (with the addition of a feat)
* It can possibly take control of Undead (I hope turn resistance adds to the saving throw for these creatures)
* It doesn't draw attacks of opportunity
* It is not subject to any kind of energy or spell resistance.
* You don't have to wait until level 5 or 6 to get it.
* Any magic item that adds CHA also adds these as well.
* You can add 2 additional bursts with a feat. This isn't so different from the extra spell slot feat exept for the fact that you can start taking this at level 1 as opposed to level 8.
* The area is much larger (30ft as opposed to 20ft)
* The save DC scales rediculously high especially with the addition of Ability Focus (Channel Energy)
* Not subject to Evasion although the less common Mettle will zero out the damage. There is not Improved Mettle though.
The only negatives that I see are that it is not quite as powerful as a fireball (damage-wise) although once it hits it's cap, the burst will get closer and closer to catching up. You can also throw a fireball a good distance but this is offset by the fact that you almost always have to throw a fireball a good distance. You usually don't want to throw it down at your feet (although I've done it before).
Did I forget anything or am I not seeing something?
By the way, I really want to be a Cleric of Nethys when we try out Pathfinder now. :)
Increasing power to the PCs is not as big a problem as it sounds, especially since this increase is front-loaded. As in, it's intended, partially, to make lower level characters more stable and longer-lasting.
Out of curiousity, does this make dipping into various classes an even more powerful option?
For example, in 3.5 a single level of cleric is a powerful dip since you get the granted powers of two domains and the majority of turn attempts that the character will have. That suddenly opens up some powerful abilities and divine feats.
The more front loaded a class is the better an idea "dipping" becomes.
Sean Mahoney
That's where for me the concern falls apart...it LOOKS like, at least, the closer to a vanilla/core book only 3.5 game you're running, the less jarring PFRPG will be....and the more splat books and expansions you add, sure you increase the risk of issues with PF, but you also increase the risk of issues with the core game.
Isn't this saying that the goal of allowing people who have spent tons on shelf loads of books to still find them useful was not met in your opinion?
(For what it is worth, my experience has been that DMs who don't take the time or enjoy learning all the books and various rules find that all the extra books "break the game" as they had no idea things could do that. DM's who are also into the extra books rarely had this problem and enjoy that aspect of the game. Neither is right or wrong, but I often get that feeling from people who just declare using everything is "broken".)
Sean Mahoney
So if I decide not to convert over and just stay 3.5, how difficult will it be to convert the adventures back to 3.5 so I can keep using the APs?
|
Creative Director
|
Increasing power to the PCs is not as big a problem as it sounds, especially since this increase is front-loaded. As in, it's intended, partially, to make lower level characters more stable and longer-lasting.Out of curiousity, does this make dipping into various classes an even more powerful option?
For example, in 3.5 a single level of cleric is a powerful dip since you get the granted powers of two domains and the majority of turn attempts that the character will have. That suddenly opens up some powerful abilities and divine feats.
The more front loaded a class is the better an idea "dipping" becomes.
Sean Mahoney
Not really, since the classes aren't front-loaded, really. The bonuses to stats are tied to the character's race, and the bonuses to hit points are across the board so that won't really help. In fact, we've made an effort to make sure that as classes rise in level, there's more goodies to get. This was done mostly to fight the (correct) perception that beyond 10th level there wasn't as strong a reason to remain with one class when you can simply switch into a prestige class and get better powers.
Furthermore, since a character's caster level is now linked to his concentration... a character who dips into a cleric class will have the benefit of domans and channeling energy and spells... but they'll stay at 1st level and thus have pretty shabby concentration checks for spells, pretty low-end effects for channeling energy, and he won't get the benefits a higher level cleric gets from his domains.
Classes aren't front-loaded, in other words. A character who dips into other classes will be more well-rounded than those who don't but a dipper will end up less powerful in the end than a character who stuck with one class for the same amount of levels, generally. That isn't to say there won't be some strong combinations... but dipping into a spellcasting class isn't going to be as broken.
|
Creative Director
|
So if I decide not to convert over and just stay 3.5, how difficult will it be to convert the adventures back to 3.5 so I can keep using the APs?
As long as you can translate changes to skills (Acrobatics is used for Jump and whatnot, etc.) and as long as you keep the CMB and CMD in mind (perhaps by treating CMB as the creature's grapple check and just ignoring CMD and using the 3.5 rules for combat maneuvers entirely), it shouldn't be difficult at all. Now and then, a creature or class will have a power that isn't covered in 3.5, but the way that stat blocks and information is presented isn't changing so it should be pretty simple to swap out powers or ignore powers as the case demands.
In the end, the conversion can be as simple or complex as you want it to be. You can certainly run a PFRPG adventure using 3.5 rules, just as you could run a 3.5 adventure using 3.0 rules. If you're not afraid of rules-laywer PCs calling you on your every move as a GM, you should be fine.