Is Pathfinder really that bad?

[Treantmonklvl20]

Hey, I still can't resist opening a "Fighter 20 vs. Wizard 20" or "Why monks don't actually suck" thread even when I KNOW it's going to annoy me

Me too.  Though I actually like pedantic discussion 

[/quote]I still don't get why we see the extremes in attitude.[/quote]

Usually I think it's more about principle than case by case evaluation in these cases.  An emotional bias will create a dogmatic approach to viewing change/lack of change that prevents you from evaluating objectively.

I don't think anyone is saying that it completely fixed 3.5

Jason Bulmahn might say that, couldn't say...

Certainly not on this thread though.  I'm not sure if fixing 3.5 while having it still feel like 3.5 is even an achievable goal.

I'm with you though, Pathfinder feels like D&D to me, and it's a supported system, unlike 3.5, which are both important to me.

I do think several factors that Pathfinder is being sold on are overstated though, like backwards compatibility for example.  Tried to run a 3.5 adventure path (which was a Paizo Pathfinder product) with Pathfinder RPG, and run into little things all the time that slow down gameplay.  Won't be doing that again.

[juton]

I do think several factors that Pathfinder is being sold on are overstated though, like backwards compatibility for example.  Tried to run a 3.5 adventure path (which was a Paizo Pathfinder product) with Pathfinder RPG, and run into little things all the time that slow down gameplay.  Won't be doing that again.

I've used some 3.5 material and never really had this problem except for calculating CMB. But I'm pretty free-form, instead of giving bad-guys the extra feats they'd get I'd give them more HP and maybe a re-roll if they where important. I'm curious what slows it down for you?

[Viletta Vadim]

I do think several factors that Pathfinder is being sold on are overstated though, like backwards compatibility for example.  Tried to run a 3.5 adventure path (which was a Paizo Pathfinder product) with Pathfinder RPG, and run into little things all the time that slow down gameplay.  Won't be doing that again.

Compatibility is the easy part, so long as you do one thing that should be SOP with most games anyways; figure out the mechanics up front.  Alice wants to play a Warblade?  Alright, figure out how the class and whichever maneuvers she selects translate to Pathfinder before it ever comes up in-game.  Sure, there's some stuff you have to avoid entirely, mainly things based on gutted mechanics (Master of Many Forms), but that's fairly minor.

[VennDygrem]

My current gaming group recently converted an ongoing game into Pathfinder, with minor changes like the skills at first and then apparently going whole-hog. I have been away at school while they made the switch, however, so in about two weeks I'll find out how it is affecting the gameplay. Already, converting my character has been a slight hassle, since it uses some things which were specifically included in the PFCR, and some things which are not. Though, some things do seem somewhat better off from the switch, like the recent wizard levels I added.

Eventually this is going to end up a game full of mangled gaming rules, including Pathfinder RPG, D&D 3.5, and even the Epic rules, so I'm somewhat worried it's going to get overly convoluted, though we'll see.

Mostly, it seems the group is treating it more like another set of houserules on top of 3.5, including what works within the campaign and excluding whatever doesn't.

[Taanyth]

Nice emotional ranting - sounds like you have a hate-on for everything Paizo.  Did Jason Bulmahn kill your dog or something?

No, i just don't like him because he is fat. And tough i admit the post could have been an emotional rant, it does state clearly why i don't like PF. If you like i can elaborate on why i don't like that stuff.

Here's a major intellect failing.

You "above anything else" (bolded) don't like PF being defended then open a thread that is clearly intended to debate the value of Pathfinder.  Your intellect astounds.    For your next trick why don't you set fire to your hair and get mad because you hate getting burned?

You are right, i should have opened another thread in another part of the forum stating that i hate paizils.

You bringing up religion is a bit ironic since you are throwing up dogma like you cut-and-paste it from a creationist website.  Nobody here is defending "everything Pathfinder", because that would be just as mind-numbingly inane as attacking everything Pathfinder.

That's why i posted this here, otherwise i would have been banned yet again. The fact that you believe that i was attacking you is amusing at best.

Oh...and I didn't just "pop up" here.  From the looks of your profile - you did.

That was just... Lame.

[Treantmonklvl20]

You are right, i should have opened another thread in another part of the forum stating that i hate paizils.

Picture begins to take form...

otherwise i would have been banned yet again.

and now crystal clear.

[Akalsaris]

Where does the term "paizil" come from, by the way?  I get the sense that it's somehow derogatory, and I've seen 2-3 posters use it, but I don't really understand what it's supposed to sound like, other than paizo + ill.

[Kuroimaken]

It comes from Paizo + fail. Let's face it, Paizil sounds better than Paizail, or something.

[Unbeliever]

... I don't love pathfinder, I don't hate it either. I don't think anyone is saying that it completely fixed 3.5, there's some debate over whether they fixed it even a little. Even if it turns out they didn't improve it, it still feels like 3.5 to me.

Since most people in 3.5 stuck purely to WotC material, they'd use anything regardless of how weird it was (Incarnum anyone) as long as it had that official WotC seal. I figure people will begin adopting Paizo stuff just because it's new and fresh for the same reasons. Ahead of that I wanted to hear opinions on what they thought worked and what they didn't ...

I was pretty much curious about the same thing:  what people thought worked and didn't work from PF.  Especially since I didn't have the time to audit it right now. 

There are 2 things about PF that figure into this debate/discussion/whatever.  First, PF both gains and loses from being essentially tweaked 3.5:  it gets a ready-made and eager audience, but on the other hand anything it does is going to naturally be judged against the extant 3.5 ruleset; if they change something and it's not for the better then they should expect some shit.  Second, PF has some serious partisans, which I've found a tad surprising.

It certainly does feel like 3.5 D&D, though.  Although the one guy I considered playing w/ was against multi-classing and prestige classes, which would undermine that statement. 

...
Mostly, it seems the group is treating it more like another set of houserules on top of 3.5, including what works within the campaign and excluding whatever doesn't.

This is where I think I will be -- at most.  It's not like I've played out all my 3.5 material yet, and we don't have a burning need to import much from Pathfinder.  Some more monsters might be nice, though one of my DMs crazily uses NPCs for his encounters, which is a lot of work, but I suppose I can rip them from Pathfinder, Iron Kingdoms (neat setting, abysmal rules), and so on. 

[Prime32]

It comes from Paizo + fail. Let's face it, Paizil sounds better than Paizail, or something.

IIRC some guys were calling them Paizanos, but were shouted down because that sounds too cool.

[Akalsaris]

It comes from Paizo + fail. Let's face it, Paizil sounds better than Paizail, or something.

Paizo: good for what Paiz-ails you!

It comes from Paizo + fail. Let's face it, Paizil sounds better than Paizail, or something.

IIRC some guys were calling them Paizanos, but were shouted down because that sounds too cool.

That has some serious Paizazz!

I don't really think Paizil manages to capture the feeling its shooting for though - it sounds more like an over-the-counter drug to me.  Maybe Paiztard would be more effective, or lolPaiz, or something?

[Kuroimaken]

Retards might take offense at being associated with Paizo.

[Hallack]

I don't have a dog in the fight for or against Pathfinder but as nick names are being discussed... Paiznik comes to mind as a possibility.

[Bozwevial]

It comes from Paizo + fail. Let's face it, Paizil sounds better than Paizail, or something.

IIRC some guys were calling them Paizanos, but were shouted down because that sounds too cool.

It's the Super Mario Brothers Super Show!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[VennDygrem]

Again, I don't dislike Pathfinder or have anything against Paizo as a company, but wouldn't it be easier to call them "Failzo" if you want to integrate the two words?

[awaken DM golem]

... and suspiciously close to the word: Pazuzu (?)

I guess that some of the [rant] stuff, is based on the commonly accepted fact that 3.5e is unbalanced / has holes / needs a few fixes ;
combined with the verging on religious Hope (with a capital H) that the fix it group, would fix exactly that.
Tough beans.
Meanwhile, the question of: "Is that where the Money's at ?!"
isn't something I know or have paid attention to.

Is the Money (the slightly big pile)
at Settings
or Fixes , with a capital F
 

[Tshern]

On a totally unrelated note, I read through the last 1.5 pages and I saw around eighteen hundred names, that were totally new to me. I am getting old.

[Akalsaris]

c=6370.msg214720#msg214720 date=1259786146]
I don't have a dog in the fight for or against Pathfinder but as nick names are being discussed... Paiznik comes to mind as a possibility.
[/quote]

In Soviet Russia, Paiznik rebalances YOU!

As far as Paizo and rebalancing goes, I think they managed to tone down wild shape, cleric melee, and 1st-5th level spells enough that the game stays roughly balanced until 11th or so, instead of starting to break down around 7th in 3.5.  After that point everything will probably go in the casters' favor as before, but c'est la vie. 

I'm really more interested in low-mid level games (since of 10 campaigns online and in person that I'm in or run that are PF or 3.5, all 10 are levels 12 or lower), and that is where the greatest "improvement" seems to have been made in class balance. 

And I do think the setting+art+modules brings in way more fans than Paizo's claims of balancing the game.  But those things probably won't bring in many of the fans from this forum anyhow

[A Man In Black]

Nice emotional ranting - sounds like you have a hate-on for everything Paizo.  Did Jason Bulmahn kill your dog or something?

Well. There's always James Jacobs and That Damn Crab. That's like killing my dog.

[Operation Shoestring]

And I do think the setting+art+modules brings in way more fans than Paizo's claims of balancing the game.  But those things probably won't bring in many of the fans from this forum anyhow

We've been spoiled by good DM's who come up with homebrew much better than the setting/modules Paizo comes up with.