Should I get Pathfinder?

[Psyren]

"Inflationary?" Did all the monsters get +2 Con or AC or saving throws when I wasn't looking? Were the DCs for every ability check raised on the sly? Did the bonus spells/PP calculation get altered somehow? So why does the net +2 for all the PC races suddenly not matter?

Your argument is waffling back and for- well, a more accurate description might be that it's drunkenly weaving all over the road. "The stat boost doesn't matter, because humans get it too and a feat!" Yeah, but they don't get darkvision or ferocity or orc-blooded or weapon familiarity or any of the things they can replace those features with. Those things might not matter to you and that's great, but you're instead trying to pretend they don't exist entirely simply because they hurt your argument.

"A 1d4 bite is crappy!" So is a 1d4 slam, yet I see a ton of people taking Warforged just to get it, for whichever PrC or feat or what have you that needs a natural attack. Plus, you know, you might not have your weapons all the time or you might want that second attack before level 6 or you might need bludgeoning damage when all you have is a greatsword etc.

"Everyone has +2 so it's meaningless!" Yet in 3.5, they didn't. Compare apples to apples, not to volkswagens. The within-system comparison is meaningless when you're trying to compare one system to another instead.

[Doug Lampert]

"Inflationary?" Did all the monsters get +2 Con or AC or saving throws when I wasn't looking? Were the DCs for every ability check raised on the sly? Did the bonus spells/PP calculation get altered somehow? So why does the net +2 for all the PC races suddenly not matter?

Your argument is waffling back and for- well, a more accurate description might be that it's drunkenly weaving all over the road. "The stat boost doesn't matter, because humans get it too and a feat!" Yeah, but they don't get darkvision or ferocity or orc-blooded or weapon familiarity or any of the things they can replace those features with. Those things might not matter to you and that's great, but you're instead trying to pretend they don't exist entirely simply because they hurt your argument.

"A 1d4 bite is crappy!" So is a 1d4 slam, yet I see a ton of people taking Warforged just to get it, for whichever PrC or feat or what have you that needs a natural attack. Plus, you know, you might not have your weapons all the time or you might want that second attack before level 6 or you might need bludgeoning damage when all you have is a greatsword etc.

"Everyone has +2 so it's meaningless!" Yet in 3.5, they didn't. Compare apples to apples, not to volkswagens. The within-system comparison is meaningless when you're trying to compare one system to another instead.

Most of the monsters were beefed up, and all of the NPCs were, and combat manuevers were changed so much as to not be really comparable. If you claim that the half-orc is a viable paladin REGARDLESS of how much better the human is (and that's the only way I can see to read your claims) then that's no different from 3.5 so no improvement there. If you are not looking at the alternatives then the half orc can be a paladin in either system.

You have offered NOTHING that makes a half orc a better choice for a paladin as compared to a human in PF that did not exist in 3.5. Not one item or fact. Strength is more important to a paladin than charisma so +2 Str for -2 to Cha was a good trade in 3.5, and PF doesn't offer that trade. Instead both the human and the half-orc get the exact same racial mods, so that CAN'T be a reason to take half-orc, and nothing else you have mentioned is anything they don't get in 3.5 where you ADMIT they were a bad choice.

Additionally the human gets nifty favored class bonueses and still gets a free feat and skills.

Hence half orcs are a worse choice in PF than in 3.5. Because choices are ALWAYS about alternatives. If the alternatives have improved more than half orc then half orc is now WORSE as a choice, even if the half-orcs numbers are higher.

DougL

[Psyren]

that's no different from 3.5 so no improvement there.

3.5 Half-Orc
PF Half-Orc

If you see no difference between these two (especially in terms of being a paladin) then I see no reason to even debate with you.

And you can still get the +2 Strength; Your Cha adjustment will be 0 instead of -2 in that case. Still better.

[Doug Lampert]

3.5 Half-Orc
PF Half-Orc

If you see no difference between these two (especially in terms of being a paladin) then I see no reason to even debate with you.

And you can still get the +2 Strength; Your Cha adjustment will be 0 instead of -2 in that case. Still better.

If playing 3.5 the choice is 3.5 human or 3.5 half orc. And you ADMIT that human is so much better that half orc is stupid.

If playing PF the choice is PF human of PF half orc. And the human is better by even more.

By your "logic" if PF had added +1000 to every ability of the human and given +2 to one ability to the half orc that would have been good for the half orc. That logic is insane. You compare the alternatives or choices within the system.

DougL

[Psyren]

We're comparing systems, remember? The topic is "should I get Pathfinder" not "what race is best for paladin in Pathfinder".

Half-orcs are objectively better at being certain classes (e.g. Paladins and Sorcerers) than they were in 3.5. Your "argument" that humans are also better is irrelevant. If I want to be a half-orc paladin, I'm no longer punished by the system for making that choice.

Your conclusion that "half-orc is a worse choice than in 3.5" makes zero sense.

[sonofzeal]

Your conclusion that "half-orc is a worse choice than in 3.5" makes zero sense.

The value of any choice is always relative to the alternatives.


Situation A: You have a choice between +3 and +2.

Situation B: You have a choice between +10 and +4.


Choosing +4 against +10 is worse than choosing +2 over +3, even though +4 is better than +2.

Make sense?

[Psyren]

The value of any choice is always relative to the alternatives.

Except this isn't a relative comparison, but an objective one. Divine Grace, for instance, is exactly the same in PF as in 3.5; assuming equal point-buy/rolls, PF half-orcs get more of it, even if they put their +2 in strength instead of Cha. Therefore they are objectively better off.

Zeal, I've understood what he's been trying to say with the human comparison since the beginning, but you're blinding yourselves to the forest by squinting at that individual tree.

By the way: the assumption that I don't agree simply because I don't understand is extremely condescending, so I'll thank you to resist the temptation to continue with that approach; I'll save you a lot of time now and tell you it really won't appeal to me at all.

[sonofzeal]

Except this isn't a relative comparison, but an objective one. Divine Grace, for instance, is exactly the same in PF as in 3.5; assuming equal point-buy/rolls, PF half-orcs get more of it, even if they put their +2 in strength instead of Cha. Therefore they are objectively better off.

Zeal, I've understood what he's been trying to say with the human comparison since the beginning, but you're blinding yourselves to the forest by squinting at that individual tree.

By the way: the assumption that I don't agree simply because I don't understand is extremely condescending, so I'll thank you to resist the temptation to continue with that approach; I'll save you a lot of time now and tell you it really won't appeal to me at all.

But PF boost everything. I mean, every race is better off now. And pretty much every class is boosted in some way, too. I simply don't understand how that's a selling point, which by my reading appears to be your claim.

No offence was meant, but I simply do not understand the point of your argument at all, and took my best guess at where the breakdown in communication was.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Except this isn't a relative comparison, but an objective one. Divine Grace, for instance, is exactly the same in PF as in 3.5; assuming equal point-buy/rolls, PF half-orcs get more of it, even if they put their +2 in strength instead of Cha. Therefore they are objectively better off.

You mean there are 3.5 paladins that don't take Serenity? Well I guess in core-only...

[Psyren]

You mean there are 3.5 paladins that don't take Serenity? Well I guess in core-only...

I'm for it personally, but there are plenty of non-core games that don't allow Dragon magazine either.

But PF boost everything. I mean, every race is better off now. And pretty much every class is boosted in some way, too. I simply don't understand how that's a selling point, which by my reading appears to be your claim.

It's a selling point because the system doesn't punish you for trying certain combinations. Want to be a half-orc paladin? You don't have to try and finagle a 14 into Cha no matter your stat budget to make your abilities worth anything. Want to be a half-elf... anything? They get a bonus feat too, one that's required for plenty of PrCs out there so they end up much closer to humans now. (And can actually beat elves at something besides incarnum for a change!)

PF buffed every race, sure, but plenty of objective benchmarks were left right where they are. Positive stat mods still happen at 12 and up. The bonus spells table is exactly the same. Metamagic is easier to fit into your build. And so on.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I'm for it personally, but there are plenty of non-core games that don't allow Dragon magazine either.

Dragon Magazine Compendium is official.

Edit: Although Realms Helps is calling it Dungeon Compendium. Either way, it's official.

[Yora]

Which it may be, but that doesn't make a difference if a GM decides not to allow it.

[Psyren]

Dragon Magazine Compendium is official.

No, it's actually 3rd-party. Check the publisher. ("Official 3rd-party", but still.)

It is accepted in many threads here, and disallowed in many others.

[sonofzeal]

It's a selling point because the system doesn't punish you for trying certain combinations. Want to be a half-orc paladin? You don't have to try and finagle a 14 into Cha no matter your stat budget to make your abilities worth anything. Want to be a half-elf... anything? They get a bonus feat too, one that's required for plenty of PrCs out there so they end up much closer to humans now. (And can actually beat elves at something besides incarnum for a change!)

PF buffed every race, sure, but plenty of objective benchmarks were left right where they are. Positive stat mods still happen at 12 and up. The bonus spells table is exactly the same. Metamagic is easier to fit into your build. And so on.

I still think the whole thing is largely illusionary. A 3.5 Half-Orc can still be a competent Paladin - he's got a penalty to Cha, sure, but Strength is just as important to most Pallies and he's got a boost there. The human bonus feat and skill points are more significant than the difference in ability scores.

In a low-op game, 3.5 Half-Orc Pally is entirely playable. In a mid/high-op game, Human is almost always a better choice. And in PF... neither of those facts has changed. The combination's still playable, and Human's still almost always a better choice.

I really don't see the point.



(And I disagree with your useage of "objective benchmarks". A benchmark is the standard result. If everyone had +8 to their most important stat, every caster would have more spells, and the benchmark for number of spells would be higher even if the table's the same, since the standard default number of spells is higher.)

[MukkTB]

In 3.5 you go to the Half Orc if you want strength at all costs. In PF you go to the Half Orc for the fluff mostly. I didn't feel that changed much. I actually play at a low enough optimization level that I didn't feel the difference between Half Orc and Human changed very much when I went from 3.5 to 3.P. Human was the better choice.

The silly thing is that instead of giving all races +2 PF could've just suggested a higher point buy value. You can get the same effect in 3.5 with a higher point buy value. Its simply a blatant attempt to seduce people. And the monsters do have to be made more powerful if all the PCs are more powerful. +X to everything isn't particularly an improvement.

PF did succeed in giving classes a bunch of little things to reduce dead levels if you ignore the tier 1 classes. Every level getting a new shiny will keep you amused. If a shiny gets old then you get a new one on the next level. The worst thing was where certain classes were entirely frontloaded so they actually functioned as 1 or 2 level dips.

[Psyren]

I still think the whole thing is largely illusionary. A 3.5 Half-Orc can still be a competent Paladin - he's got a penalty to Cha, sure, but Strength is just as important to most Pallies and he's got a boost there.

So does the PF one, if you want him to. And if you do, he still comes out ahead in Cha.

If race choices are so illusionary, why do handbooks put so much stock in them? Did you guys enjoy seeing half-orc/half-elf in red for almost every caster and plenty of melee?

If that's the case... then have fun with 3.5, I won't stop you.

And I disagree with your useage of "objective benchmarks".

You can disagree all you want; until you show me where PF has changed the bonus spell and modifier system from 3.5, the facts remain unassailable. More stats + same system = advantage.

@ Mukk: Not all DMs use point buy. Stat boosts matter as much for random rolls as they do for PB, unless you roll all high or all low.

[sonofzeal]

So does the PF one, if you want him to. And if you do, he still comes out ahead in Cha.

If race choices are so illusionary, why do handbooks put so much stock in them? Did you guys like seeing half-orc/half-elf in red for almost every caster and plenty of melee?

If that's the case... then have fun with 3.5, I won't stop you.

Half-Orcs were terrible choices for Wizards, because Int was so central to them, and Strength was so unnecessary. But for a Paladin, Str and Cha are both quite benefitial, and trading one for the other isn't necessarily a bad thing. A race that gave -2 Str and +2 Cha would be a little awkward for Pally, but entirely playable - they could either dump Str entirely, or simply counterbalance with pointbuy or gear. Same with Half-Orcs - either dump Cha and do without, or counterbalance. And a +2/-2 isn't at all hard to counterbalance, when you're trading between two useful quantities.

Elves, meanwhile, sucked at it because Con is important for Pallies and Dex generally isn't. That makes it a seriously bad trade. And PF Elves are still bad choices for Pallies. That hasn't changed either.

You can disagree all you want; until you show me where PF has changed the bonus spell and modifier system from 3.5, the facts remain unassailable. More stats + same system = advantage.

"Advantage" implies you've improved while the opposition has remained the same or gotten weaker. But the things a Half-Orc Paladin will be fighting
have changed. Opponents are stronger too. I looked up Ogre just to verify - the PF version has (admittedly slightly) more AC and more HP. It also traded Weapon Focus for Iron Will, but that's neither here nor there.

Point is, Bestiary enemies are generally stronger, and NPC enemies are almost certainly stronger.

So no. "Advantage" is not a term I'd use here. PF races/classes don't compare to 3.5 races/classes in a void, they compare against alternatives available and against obstacles they're likely to face.

[Reverent-One]

"Advantage" implies you've improved while the opposition has remained the same or gotten weaker. But the things a Half-Orc Paladin will be fighting
have changed. Opponents are stronger too. I looked up Ogre just to verify - the PF version has (admittedly slightly) more AC and more HP. It also traded Weapon Focus for Iron Will, but that's neither here nor there.

Point is, Bestiary enemies are generally stronger, and NPC enemies are almost certainly stronger.

So one monster has a single extra hit point and you can claim that Bestiary enemies are generally stronger? What about the Dire Wolf, which lost an entire HD in the conversion to PF while remaining the same CR? Or the Adult Black Dragon that lost 5 HD for 30 HP, admittedly gaining one point of AC, and also remained the same CR?

[Psyren]

It's easy to tunnel-vision to examples that don't oppose your point of view.

Lets look at trolls - way easier in PF. First off, they're humanoid (giant) now, so you've got a lot more options for handling them magically right off the bat. Their size bonus to grapple got nicely smacked down. Darkvision range ate a 50% nerf too. Rend damage taken down. Then we get to the key trick; their regen. If all you have is a torch, in 3.5 killing that troll will take a loooooooong time. PF? Burn him for even 1 fire damage between swings and it's lights out in seconds.

I notice you didn't say a thing about the spell slots or modifiers - because you can't of course.

Speaking of spell slots, the PF Half-orc paladin gets more of them. That means, core-to-core, he has more ways to take care of that ogre you mentioned. And I haven't even touched on the buffs the class itself got.

EDIT: ohai, Reverent!

So no. "Advantage" is not a term I'd use here.

Whereas I still would. So I guess we're at an impasse then, aren't we?

Well, except for the good news - I can still keep playing and enjoying PF, and you lot can keep futilely trying to convince people not to in threads like this one.

[sonofzeal]

So one monster has a single extra hit point and you can claim that Bestiary enemies are generally stronger? What about the Dire Wolf, which lost an entire HD in the conversion to PF while remaining the same CR? Or the Adult Black Dragon that lost 5 HD for 30 HP, admittedly gaining one point of AC, and also remained the same CR?

hmm.... *checks a few more*

...yep. Damage output especially seems generally lower.

So PCs are stronger and monsters are weaker. I should have expected that, actually - Paizo seems all about making people feel awesome and badass for switching. It also doesn't seem to resolve what we were discussing. Even granted that PF Half-Orc Pallies have an advantage, just about everyone in PF has an advantage. Congrats, the game just became easier across the board. I don't see how it leads to better gameplay though.

[sonofzeal]

I notice you didn't say a thing about the spell slots or modifiers - because you can't of course.

Errr.... no, because I said it five posts ago.

[Psyren]

Well, you were just proven wrong about objective benchmarks being higher, and you're also wrong that PF half-orc paladins have no place in a mid/high-op game (since they don't get negatives to any of their important stats like they do in 3.5, they aren't hobbled out of the gate like they used to be.) If that's still "illusionary" to you then I have nothing else to say.

[sonofzeal]

Well, you were just proven wrong about objective benchmarks being higher, and you're also wrong that PF half-orc paladins have no place in a mid/high-op game (since they don't get negatives to any of their important stats like they do in 3.5.) So I'd say the only illusion here is your argument, really.

When I defined the term "benchmark" in that post you conveniently skipped over, I clearly defined it in a way that's still relevant. We compare the result of choosing Half-Orc for Paladin against the result of other similar choices. Turns out, the standard in PF is higher! Most races make better Paladins than they do in 3.5. Thus, the benchmark is higher. It's as simple as that.

And 3.5 Half-Orc Paladins had just about a similar role. They had a negative to an important stat, but a positive to another one, and that's pretty much a wash in most cases. The reason they suffered in 3.5 was because they had no other relevant racial traits besides Darkvision as far as a Paladin was concerned, and that's still pretty much the case. I guess the +2 Intimidate is something...?

So if you're in the sort of game that, in 3.5, would have precluded playing a Half-Orc Paladin... then in PF you're probably still in the same boat. Human skill bonus crushes the tiny Intimidate bonus, and a free bonus feat is still an awesome commodity. Both of those make Human more desirable than Half-Orc, if you're in a game where such differences matter.

And if you're not... hey, 3.5 Half-Orc Paladin is entirely decent too!

[Psyren]

You're still wrong about the benchmark, because races aren't just compared to each other, they're compared to objective challenges as well.

Such as monsters, and having enough spells.
Which you got wrong.


And if you want to play a Half-Orc, just without being punished for it by stat penalties where it counts?

In 3.5, you wouldn't.
In PF, you would.
Improvement.

(I'm not even restricting it to Paladins; even Bards and Sorcerers count.)

[sonofzeal]

And if you want to play a Half-Orc, just without being punished for it by stat penalties where it counts?

In 3.5, you wouldn't.
In PF, you would.
Improvement.

And my point, as I've said before, is that the "punishment" you're referring to is largely psychological. Half-Orc Paladin feels like a bad choice in 3.5, because you've got that terrifying negative number there. But the result of choosing it is fairly decent, and in practice that stat penalty can be easily compensated for. There's no "punishment" there, just a psychological disincentive.

(The "punishment" comes when you factor in skill points and free feat from being Human, which are still entirely relevant. PF Half-Orc Paladins are "punished" about as badly for not choosing Human, it's merely less obvious now.)

[ericgrau]

What I'm asking here is whether or not there are enough differences between D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder to make it worth getting PF, or any other reason why I should (or shouldn't) get PF.

IMO nope, there aren't. Stick with what you have. However, there are 2 sides to that coin. It also doesn't hurt to play PF instead of 3.5. I jumped right into a PF group and can't complain about much. So, basically play whatever your friends are playing so you can get a game going.

I actually skipped the core rulebook. I rely on the SRD or friends' books to level up and that's about all I need it for; and even then the class changes could fit in the margins of my character sheet. I did however buy the Advanced Player's Guide because that's one of the books with interesting new options. If you want to treat PF (except core) like new splatbooks and you like that sort of thing too then it could be worth a shot. Or even play 3.5 with PF material, though the minor differences might cause a little trouble.

[sonofzeal]

You're still wrong about the benchmark, because races aren't just compared to each other, they're compared to objective challenges as well.

Such as monsters, and having enough spells.
Which you got wrong.

I got monsters wrong. I admitted it. Let's move on, unless you're going to strike some deep penetrating point about the awesomeness of PF based on PF PCs being stronger and monsters being weaker.

[Psyren]

There's no "punishment" there, just a psychological disincentive.

That's not how point buy works. The difference between 14 and 16, or 16 and 18, is more than just "psychological disincentive" - it's a real cost that has real implications for your build.

Hell, even the difference between 10 and 12 can mean some of your class features working or not.

(The "punishment" comes when you factor in skill points and free feat from being Human, which are still entirely relevant. PF Half-Orc Paladins are "punished" about as badly for not choosing Human, it's merely less obvious now.)

This is where the psychology comes in, actually. If you want to be a half-orc, why look at humans at all?


And by the by, you CAN edit your posts you know...

[sonofzeal]

That's not how point buy works. The difference between 14 and 16, or 16 and 18, is more than just "psychological disincentive" - it's a real cost that has real implications for your build.

This is relevant for a Sorcerer, who likely wants to drop Strength entirely. But if a Half-Orc Paladin is putting points into both Strength and Cha, it's more a matter of just rebalancing between them.

[Psyren]

This is relevant for a Sorcerer, who likely wants to drop Strength entirely. But if a Half-Orc Paladin is putting points into both Strength and Cha, it's more a matter of just rebalancing between them.

Which the PF one can do much more easily, since his are separated by 2 points instead of 4, and no negatives.