A possible change

TheTick · October 21, 2012, 10:36:25 AM

I'm thinking of switching our campaign over to Pathfinder from DnD 3.5. I'm in a Pathfinder game over at Sakeriver, and I'm really liking some of the fixes it has over standard 3.5E. Functionally, those of you who I've helped build characters for wouldn't notice much of a change, other than a skill renamed here and there, and a few class features that are beefed up. Monks and Paladins in particular get a boost.

One other thing this might help is with adventure planning. There are a ton of detailed 'adventure paths' for PF that I really like, and it would be a good jumping off point for folks that want to change up their characters. If you are curious, you can see the Pathfinder SRD (similar to the one we've been using for 3.5, but with a lot more of the content available) here. If you are happy with 3.5E, that works too - I have a few things to throw at you soon, and you WILL be getting a new level soon. That's always fun!

Lotofsnow · October 21, 2012, 10:38:49 AM

I'm in favor. I like barbarian rage much more in Pathfinder than in 3.5.

SteveRogers · October 21, 2012, 12:45:27 PM

I'm not sure how much of a change that would be for me, so I'll have to look at the link you posted.

TheTick · October 21, 2012, 08:30:21 PM

Bards play pretty much exactly the same - you get 1st level spells from the start, but beyond that, not much change. What you WOULD want to check are the archetypes - ways to customize your character with different abilities without waiting to multiclass or look through 50 books for a specific feat. For instance, the Prankster archetype (only available to Gnome Bards) trades in Fascinate, Suggestion, Mass Suggestion and Lore Master to get Mock, Punchline, Mass Punchline and Swap. A Savage Skald plays completely differently, especially when compared to a Celebrity or an Archaeologist.

Lotofsnow · October 21, 2012, 10:15:19 PM

Maybe I'll switch to my Pathfinder Society dwarf witch named Crackers.

TheTick · October 22, 2012, 01:39:14 PM

A witch named Crackers? I'd be curious as to how that name came about.

Lotofsnow · October 22, 2012, 01:41:17 PM

Well, you'd have to be crackers to be a dwarf witch.

SteveRogers · October 22, 2012, 02:47:08 PM

Bigsby would be sad to see Yiki go.

Lotofsnow · October 22, 2012, 03:09:05 PM

No worries. I'll be continuing on with Yiki.

TheTick · October 22, 2012, 10:12:24 PM

Unless he gets digested by a gelatinous cube. Been known to happen to adventurers.

pooka · October 26, 2012, 09:06:58 PM

I think it would be alright.

TheTick · October 26, 2012, 09:23:31 PM

It might actually end up a bit easier for you, as they pared down the skills a bit and made skill ranks make more sense. I've actually already built Imfei as a Pathfinder character, as I wanted to build a Paladin in PF anyway.

Sputnik314 · January 25, 2013, 09:08:04 PM

May I join? I will star as Taggart again, only I would prefer to be a rouge instead of a ranger.

TheTick · January 25, 2013, 10:47:58 PM

Sure, a rogue is always a welcome addition to an adventuring group. Check the Pathfinder SRD entry for them, and see if a specific archetype jumps out at you. May not want to pick one that trades away trapfinding though.

Sputnik314 · January 26, 2013, 04:04:43 PM

So, do I get any benefits from using an archetype? Do I have to do an archetype? Why is it recommended that I keep Trapfinding? How does Hide in plain sight work? Sorry, I don't have much pathfinder experience. Of course I dont have much D and D either, but I dont know the difference between a piston and a shoe here.