Jumping from 3.5 to Pathfinder after years

[Stormydove]

Just saw someone post a thread about a 2e version of pathfinder, it seemed like discussion but hoping that as were jumping into pathfinder I hope there isn't really talk of a new edition already!

That's why were dumping D&D, due to the amount of new editions coming out and why we love 3.5 but are hoping for a much cleaner experience in Pathfinder. So tell me there is no official talk but just rumors plzzzzzz!

So anyways on to my next question which I looked up and totally got the answer too, but since I am typing away I'm a ask.

I see that there is no official Epic levels, (Which is a bummer seeing as our highest in our group is 28th) so that answers that. Unless there are epic rules in an official book and if so then point me that way.

However, what I am asking is this book "Mythic Adventurers" is this Epic level per-say? As in? Like, if you got to say 20th then (I dunno, never read it yet) went Mythic, are you basically going Epic?

Forgive a noober gamer girl for her lack of info, however soon I shall be very Pathfinder savvy.

Thanks Community!

[Ciaran Barnes]

First of all, you'll have to settle with Acrobaticsing from 3.5 to Pathfinder.

Second of all, Mythic is not the same as Epic, but occupies a niche similar to it.

[Pan]

Hi, welcome.

If you are interested in mythic take a peek here

[Jack Assery]

We're just talking, no word of anything new and probably not for a long time.

[Stormydove]

Jack Assery wrote:

We're just talking, no word of anything new and probably not for a long time.

Horray!

[Googleshng]

Any time the concept of a new edition is brought up with anyone at Paizo, the general response tends to be along the lines of "We made this game in the first place to make sure there was still rules support for all our modules. We aren't about to go changing everything now." Speculative threads are still going to exist though.

[Dragonchess Player]

Based on Paizo's publishing schedule and the emphasis placed on adventures/campaign material, rather than "splat-books," I'm not expecting them to even start "2nd edition" planning/development for at least another year or two. An 8-10 year edition-life is probably a decent minimum estimate; Pathfinder is only 5 years old.

Note that rulebooks are not (unlike WotC) Paizo's primary RPG income stream. That, as well as the limited release schedule, reduces the incentive for "starting over" every 3-5 years.

[Stormydove]

Jack Assery wrote:

We're just talking, no word of anything new and probably not for a long time.

Thanks for the info, very helpful

Dragonchess Player wrote:

Note that rulebooks are not (unlike WotC) Paizo's primary RPG income stream. That, as well as the limited release schedule, reduces the incentive for "starting over" every 3-5 years.

Fantastic, makes me feel safer about jumping in!

[Anonymous Visitor 163 576]

While it doesn't seem to be available from my phone, teres a very good thread at giant in the playground about changing from 3.5 to Pathfinder.

There are alot of small changes, you'll not notice them all right away unless you're a lot sharper than I am.

[Jack Assery]

Yeah I had trouble too with stuff like stabilizing from dying, acrobatics, feats and spell working differently, etc; that said, minor changes for the better.

[DigitalMage]

Stormydove wrote:

That's why were dumping D&D, due to the amount of new editions coming out and why we love 3.5 but are hoping for a much cleaner experience in Pathfinder.

Whilst Pathfinder made some great improvements over 3.5, it also made quite a few changes that imho make the game worse. So be careful about "upgrading", make sure that PF fixes the issues you have with 3.5 and that overall the benefit of those fixes to you outweighs any problems you may feel PF introduces.

Personally I still prefer 3.5 over PF and as a player would not play a PF game unless it was PFS.

So I suggest checking out the free PRD and asking on these forums how PF handles some of the stuff you have issues with in 3.5.

But as for a new edition, I personally don't see it happening anytime soon, even if I believe it could do with a revision.

[Black Feather]

It's slightly more balanced, for a few reasons.

It's harder to abuse polymorph stuff...which is needed mechanically but doesn't really make sense thematically.

Some spells got taken down a notch. Summons make sense as taking longer IMO, but buffs not quite so much. Other spells got one or more saving throws for whatever reason when they didn't have them before.

CMB / CMD were put in for some reason...just to add extra mechanics to keep track of / modify. I suppose it's helpful for some people doing maneuvers but it's mostly a pain.

A few things you got for free in 3.5 you now have to pay feats for -- for instance, they split up tripping feats / bonuses for whatever reason. Archery is a little better.

Skills are more streamlined -- you get a flat bonus for a class skill rather than extra points at first level, and you can put points into whatever you like and not worry about paying twice as much for non-class skills. Also, some skills were bundled together...listen, spot, and search are now perception; jump, tumble, and balance are now acrobatics, etc. Positive changes IMO.

The way to ultimate power is still to play a caster, but prestige classes are no longer uber. As a matter of fact, the overwhelming majority of them are worse than base classes. CoDzilla is still around, as is the dumpster-diving wizard, but a lot of the 3.5 stuff that was open to abuse isn't there anymore (sublime chord, ur-priest, etc).

The mechanical stuff of interest is usually new classes and archetypes (that modify a base class). Some of them are a straight power-up, some are a good bit worse, and others are just different flavor or mechanic and similar power.
_____

Most people who play are ones who liked 3.x but there are n00bs too. I played 4th a few times and I didn't hate it but, unlike from 2 to 3rd ed, it was too unlike what was before. We who played 2nd and 3rd liked character-design flexibility and tactical flexibility as well...which Paizo has kept I think and 4th didn't really.

[Lathiira]

I imagine that the Pathfinder 2E thread we're seeing this week is just to give us something to read about besides the normal martial/caster disparity, rogues/monks/fighters suck and need fixed/here's how, and falling paladin threads that are all pretty common. Along with alignment threads, of course! = )