I’m a long time DM considering returning to the table. I’ve extensively played D&D 3.5 and some 4E and I’m torn now because there are things from both that I like, and things from both that either I, or my players, dislike. So I’m considering Pathfinder as an alternative. We’re intrigued by the class, race, and rules revisions. However before we shell out the cash to make the switch I’d like to find out from you, the experts, what you think about a few things.
I’m considering continuing a D&D 3.5 campaign that stopped at 14th level by converting the campaign over to the Pathfinder rules. I’ve seen the beta rules and looked at the PRD, but I found them incomplete in answering my questions (or I just didn’t find the right parts). If you care to direct me to particular applicable parts of either I can check them out. But I’m most interested to learn if the revisions were effective in improving the play experience.
This is focused on things that I would like to have changed about D&D 3.5 and I’m hoping you all can tell me if they’ve been addressed and/or modified in Pathfinder.
My inquiry continues HERE with regard to parts of 4E that I’d like to add or convert over into a possible Pathfinder game.
Many thanks, to any and all who chose to contribute.
PART ONE: The things I’m hoping Pathfinder has improved from D&D 3.5. Where I know changes have been made I’ll ask specifically targeted questions.
• Spell Caster Dominance: This was a serious issue in my 3.5 campaign. An arcane sorceror in the party essentially dominated every situation unless I specifically engineered the encounter to focus on someone else. Has this been effectively addressed in Pathfinder?
• Skill Obsolescence: This is related to Spell Caster Dominance in that by 10th level or so the characters who had focused on skills were completely overshadowed by the arcane spell caster in the party. Virtually any skill oriented task could be completed more rapidly and more reliably with an arcane spell (knock for open locks, invisibility for stealth, teleport rather than survival in the wilderness, spider climb for climb, fly for jump and so on).
• Static Battlefield: I never liked the fact that to get multiple attacks essentially all combatants had to stand still on the battlefield (except the 5’ step of course). Have the revised feats such as Cleave and new feats such as Overhand Chop encouraged mobility on the battlefield?
• Overly Complex Special Maneuvers: Obvious the CMB/CMD system directly addresses this. Has it been a successful addition to your games?
• DM Prep Time: This is my biggest gripe. Wealth management always seemed a problem to me. It used to take me hours to make a single high level NPC if I wanted the details to be accurate. Has the new skill system helped speed up NPC generation in particular? Has any other part of DM Prep been streamlined?
• High Calculation Combat Effects (negative levels, ability damage): I never liked penalties (or bonuses for that matter) that essentially required you to recalculate your character sheet in mid-game. Are there any alternatives to be found in Pathfinder? (or any house rules that serve a similar function?)
• Healer Dependence: I always bothered me that a party pretty much could not succeed without a dedicated healer in the party because healing by any other means was so slow as to prevent further adventuring (even skill assisted overnight heal rates). Has Pathfinder improved on this at all?
All comments and welcome and appreciated!
I was/am at a crossroad my self. I've played every version of the game (except 4e which I will not touch for MANY reasons.) I'm conflicted about Pathfinder. First off I've bought all the main rule books. They're good. really good. The problem though is the system at high levels. What do I mean? Make a 16th level npc. go ahead. I'll give you 1/2 an hour. What's that? you need more time? you need a calculator?? Oh come on!Make a 16th level fighter. That's easy..no. It's not. At high levels the game falls apart. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. I know because I've been there. At the moment I'm running a Castles and Crusades game. It's Very rules light and relies on imagination more than stats. I miss the feats and skills but at the same time I realise that they are like the cake that I as a diabetic should not have.
I was/am at a crossroad my self. I've played every version of the game (except 4e which I will not touch for MANY reasons.) I'm conflicted about Pathfinder. First off I've bought all the main rule books. They're good. really good. The problem though is the system at high levels. What do I mean? Make a 16th level npc. go ahead. I'll give you 1/2 an hour. What's that? you need more time? you need a calculator?? Oh come on!Make a 16th level fighter. That's easy..no. It's not. At high levels the game falls apart. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. I know because I've been there. At the moment I'm running a Castles and Crusades game. It's Very rules light and relies on imagination more than stats. I miss the feats and skills but at the same time I realise that they are like the cake that I as a diabetic should not have.
You may want to pick up a character generator like PCGen. If you have a handle on the game and rules you can put together characters in ~10 minutes. The program manages all the math and makes life a lot easier.
I have played every version of D&D that's been put out, including 4e (which I enjoy, but feel is really more of a tactical battle simulation than a D&D style role-playing game). I am just now kicking off my first Pathfinder campaign and will be playing my first character in a Pathfinder campaign in a few weeks.
Spell caster dominance has been specifically addressed by Pathfinder. How well is a judgment call. I've never really enjoyed playing godlike characters anyway, there are games to play if you want to be a superhero. I prefer playing games that still have some semblance of sanity to them. For that reason my group usually wrapped up our campaigns about level 12 - 14 or so and started again at level 1-6.
Wealth generation is one of those things that you either agonize over or you don't. I don't. My NPCs have what I consider to be reasonably amounts of magic items and treasure. If they have magic items you can be dang certain that they will use them against the PCs.
I've never experienced the healing problem you describe. Then again my groups tend to be more role-playing oriented than battle oriented so combat happens, but it's usually not back to back to back combat with a rest to regain spells and then soldier on. That's what 4e feels like to me anyway, so if I want to do that, I'll play 4e.
My opinion of Pathfinder so far as I've been creating the NPCs and workign with the characters to create their PCs is that it resembles 3.5 but that the spellcasting does seem nerfed a bit, melee classes (especially the fighter) seem beefed up and the new content seems to be well thought out and to "fit" into the fantasy world pretty well.
Maybe after a month of running a Pathfinder campaign I might change my mind, but right now I'm excited about it.
|
I've also DM'd through all editions but balked at 4E. We switched to Pathfinder because we loved the APs and the promised direction and we haven't been disappointed.
The Spell Caster Dominance was addressed by Pathfinder and improved but it still pops back up about 10th level. The great thing about the APs is that there are plenty of things for non-spellcasters to do and shine at.
Skill Obsolescense is still a problem, but I tend to think of skills as a way to accomplish at lower levels what you can't do yet with spells. This really only becomes a serious problem if your spell casters are trying to dominate the game.
Mobility on the battlefield is much better. Cleave is vastly improved. The new CMB/CMD system works although some monsters CMDs are outrageously high.
I use Hero Lab to put NPCs together which makes it simple and fast. I can put a high level character together in 20 minutes.
One of the best improvements in Pathfinder is the change to how negative levels and other temp stuff is calculated. It's very easy to do it on the fly. It's also simple (although sometimes expensive) to reverse some of these things which makes these penalties less feared by the players. Some of the most dangerous and feared spells no longer are game enders so some of the drama is gone, but it's still exciting.
We're playing without a dedicated healer for the first time. The players had to stock up on wands and put points in Use Magic Device but they are managing okay. If anything, their strategy has improved because they would prefer not to exhaust their wands too quickly. Even when we did have a dedicated healer, the channel ability really improved game play, freeing the cleric up to do many more things during a battle than heal.
So I hope that helps. Good luck with your decision.
• Spell Caster Dominance: I never had a big problem with this in 3.5 (and had never heard of this until I came to these boards and see people argue about it all the time) but the other classes have been significantly improved to bring their power level up.
• Skill Obsolescence: Spellcasters can't replace skills with spells without sacrificing something. They get limited spells per day so if they focus their spells on making skills obsolete then they're not doing battlefield control or nuking anything. It's just not a big deal. I wish fighters got more skill points though.
• Static Battlefield: This is pretty much the same. If you move more than 5 feet you don't get your full attack. You could always house rule this out. I believe others on here have. You could also make Pounce a feat. Again a house rule.
• Overly Complex Special Maneuvers: This is much better than 3.5's system. Grapple rules are still kind of complicated but not nearly as confusing as 3.5's were.
• DM Prep Time: Seems to be about the same.
• Healer Dependence: Never had a problem playing without a dedicated healer. Use Magic Device plus a wand of cure light wounds works wonders.
Finarin,
While I can't really answer your questions any better than the others here, the pdf of the core book is only $10. That makes it very cheap to buy and test out yourself.
Also, if you look to the left of the forum, there's a link called PRD. It has the rules in it so you can see the changes before you buy.
Disclaimer: The following is the opinion on someone who, after decades of RPG experience, has found himself in a place more Savage Worlds than D&D 3.5.
Of your list, the only things I believe have been effectively addressed by Pathfinder are:
Overly Complex Special Maneuvers -- This has been pretty well addressed by CMB/CMD.
High Calculation Combat Effects -- This has been somewhat addressed by changes in things like negative levels and dispelling, but it is still a problem.
Unfortunately, the other problems you enumerated remain pretty much unmitigated. This is partially the result of the desire to protect backward compatibility, but some low-hanging fruit remained bafflingly unpicked. Pathfinder is my system of choice despite these shortcomings because:
1. High-value network. There is a well run organized play program with great content and strong participation. Many people playing pathfinder, and lots of support.
2. Product quality. The adventure paths and setting material consistently reach levels of quality only rarely hit by WotC.
3. Paizo. The people here are just great. The company is very open, communicative, and respectful compared to most.
4. It's still great fun! :)
5. The network. Yeah, I said it twice, but it's that important.
|
• Spell Caster Dominance: This was a serious issue in my 3.5 campaign. An arcane sorceror in the party essentially dominated every situation unless I specifically engineered the encounter to focus on someone else. Has this been effectively addressed in Pathfinder?
Don't want to derail your thread so I cannot answer this one.
• Skill Obsolescence: This is related to Spell Caster Dominance in that by 10th level or so the characters who had focused on skills were completely overshadowed by the arcane spell caster in the party. Virtually any skill oriented task could be completed more rapidly and more reliably with an arcane spell (knock for open locks, invisibility for stealth, teleport rather than survival in the wilderness, spider climb for climb, fly for jump and so on).
Same as #1.
• Static Battlefield: I never liked the fact that to get multiple attacks essentially all combatants had to stand still on the battlefield (except the 5’ step of course). Have the revised feats such as Cleave and new feats such as Overhand Chop encouraged mobility on the battlefield?
Never found it an issue.
• Overly Complex Special Maneuvers: Obvious the CMB/CMD system directly addresses this. Has it been a successful addition to your games?
It is a different mechanic to get used to, but it is also a single mechanic to deal with all the special maneuvers.
• DM Prep Time: This is my biggest gripe. Wealth management always seemed a problem to me. It used to take me hours to make a single high level NPC if I wanted the details to be accurate. Has the new skill system helped speed up NPC generation in particular? Has any other part of DM Prep been streamlined?
I liked the DM prep time issue in 4e also. Though I never had this "Hours to create a high level NPC" issue. I only used the main stats that would be used, if something came up where you needed something NOT written down it fell into DM fiat.
The skill system helps for your issue though. Gone is the 4times multiplier @ 1st. Added in its place is the +3 to class skill you are trained in. I feel it makes it cleaner and faster to do skill points.
• High Calculation Combat Effects (negative levels, ability damage): I never liked penalties (or bonuses for that matter) that essentially required you to recalculate your character sheet in mid-game. Are there any alternatives to be found in Pathfinder? (or any house rules that serve a similar function?)
Do not recalculate. If you get hit with a penalty to levels or ability scores just copy down the penalty to stats. I liked that all penalties were of limited duration. Many penalties in 3e/PF have a longer duration than "End of Encounter". I don't sweat over it though. I would just give the ability to shorten the durations to the party than make then recalculate all the time.
• Healer Dependence: I always bothered me that a party pretty much could not succeed without a dedicated healer in the party because healing by any other means was so slow as to prevent further adventuring (even skill assisted overnight heal rates). Has Pathfinder improved on this at all?
It is a fine balancing point. Many find the 100% heal overnight a poor mechanic in 4e. PF did not change the way that you heal over night.
I liked the way that healer dependence was lessened in 4e but you really did need one in a group. Otherwise there were few ways to use your healing surges. Some classes could trigger their surges but not all,not even most. A leader was needed.
I think all the issues you mentioned have been adressed in some manner, but honestly they have not been solved, I think it is part of staying close to the 3.5 system which has it's drawbacks and advantages.
Healer dependency is still a bit of a problem, but really nothing that can't be easily adressed by giving access to some free items or feats with maybe a little houseruling.
Caster dominance, if this is really a problem, consider not allowing full casters, having casters take a non-caster class once every 4 levels will balance things out decently for a mild power adjustment of caster types.
I never had much trouble with 3.5 or pathfinder as I find it easy to houserule things to fit our group's preferences. Overall though the pathfinder rules are better than 3.5 but takes some getting used to.
I hate to say it really, because it sounds a bit cheesy, but a big part in liking pathfinder comes from paizo's staff being more approachable and 'tuned in' with the players, striving to deliver high quality gaming products.
Wow! Thanks for the many helpful responses!
So of my original questions it sounds like many of them have been addressed by Pathfinder at least to some extent.
• Spell Caster Dominance: It appears this is still going to be an issue. But the other classes have been beefed up a bit so while the disparity is still present it may be less prevalent. I can’t avoid this issue by disallowing casters as the 14th level sorceror is the central character of the remaining storyline we wish to pursue.
• Skill Obsolescence: Still an issue, the improvement of the skill bonus feats and skill focus may help with this by raising the totals. The issue of limited spell casting resources was raised, but in practice we found that the sorceror almost never ran out of the necessary spells (which were usually lower level spells).
• Static Battlefield: The Vital Strike and revised Cleave feat chains seem to directly address this issue. It seems like the options are there for people who want to take them.
• Overly Complex Special Maneuvers: People seem to pretty universally like the CMB/CMD system which I’m glad to hear!
• High Calculation Combat Effects: It seems like simplified negative levels and ability damage penalties (not actually changing the numbers but giving specific penalties to each penalized stat) has made this easier to handle in game. Afflictions also seem a more unified way of handling a lot of the causes of such things.
• Healer Dependence: Seems this is still an issue, but that healers may be more fun to play with the new channeling mechanics. This is also cool. In our 3.5 campaign we had several sessions without a healer. In these we followed the wand of cure spells route. While it served adequately, it was drudgery to sit after each battle and figure out how many charges were required to heal the party back up to full (often requiring a dozen or more cure rolls for a higher level party). I may still have to look at some house rules to deal with this if we are without a healer.
• DM Prep Time: This seems like where the least amount of progress has been made, but I will check out both PCGen and Hero Lab which may help. It also looks like some of the treasure tables and the guide lines for NPC generation may be easier than they were in 3.5.
Thank you all very much for your time and comments! They’ve all been very helpful. I hope more people will feel free to add their voices and experiences to this. Especially if they’ve found ways to tweak Pathfinder to improve any of these issues.
Thanks Again!
I have never had a problem with pathfinder at any level. And with hero lab I can nock off a 16-20 level character in 10 min :)
Bunch o' questions
My take...
Caster dominance is still pretty much the case; however, I think Pathfinder is generally better about this than 3.5. Casters get more HP and their classes have more abilities built in, but, almost all of what I would have considered the really good/broken core spells of 3.5 have been hit with the nerf bat repeatedly.
That being said, since Pathfinder does improve the "base classes" of the arcane casters, at least, if you play Pathfinder + all the 3.5 material you probably get casters that are even more broken. So I don't recommend trying that.
Static battlefield: The game still isn't quite where I'd like it to be here, but I think various options (a lot of which are in the APG) do make this less bad than in 3.5.
Prep time: Still pretty hefty; this can be somewhat mitigated in that I think the Adventure Paths put out by Paizo are very good, but DM prep time for a handcrafted campaign was one of my big complaints about 3.5 and, really, it still would be about PF if I was running a handcrafted campaign. (I'll give it a shot again one of these days, but right now running an AP is much more compatible with my level of free time.)
Waiting for CODzilla to show up and tell the OP that unless he plays a primary caster he is unworthy of playing a D20 game... ;)
At really high levels (and yes, thank the coding geniuses at HeroLab for an awesome program) skills become important again as spells tend to neutralize each other out. (For a simple example, true seeing overcomes magical disguises, but not mundane ones, making disguise a useful skill for high level con artists.)
I guess it's still an issue, or can still be an issue depending on play styles, but I'd say Pathfinder has addressed the problem to some degree. For example, death spells no longer outright kill, and the martial classes like fighter and paladin did not only get a serious boost (so they can easily outpace casters when it comes to dealing damage) but also some options to do more than just hurt the enemy (with things like critical feats that let you stagger or stun enemies, among other things)
Teleport is still the number one for quickly moving to a far-away place you visited already, but you need to have been there already to avoid mishap-prone teleporting, and depending on caster level and party size, you don't always get to teleport everyone.
For other things like fly, invisibility, spider-climb knock: You need the spell prepared and use it up. And if you need it several times, you need to prepare it several times. A sorcerer can manage repeated castings (if he chooses the spells), but every time he uses such a "skill shortcut", he uses up a spell he could otherwise have used in a fight.
And invisibility isn't always the best bet. A lot of higher-level critters can see invisibility, and so can many spellcasters. It's good to have genuine stealth abilities to fall back on.
I think the real trick here is not to sweat things too much. The NPC doesn't really need to be created in full detail.
Beyond that, Pathfinder has some things to help: There's an NPC creation section in the book with not only wealth by level guidelines, but also more detailed guidelines on what to spend the money on (offensive stuff, defensive stuff etc.)
The Gamemastery Guide has an NPC gallery that can serve as a baseline for other NPCs (or used as they are). The gallery is also in the PRD, so you can get it for free.
Beyond that, character generators like PCGen (which is free) or HeroLab (which is not free) can help.