Should I get Pathfinder?

[sonofzeal]

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

In 3.5:

Human Paladin, 32 pb

16 str (10pts)
12 dex (4pts)
14 con (6pts)
8 int (0pts)
14 wis (6pts)
14 cha (6pts)


Half-Orc Paladin, 32 pb

16 str (6pts)
12 dex (4pts)
14 con (6pts)
6 int (0pts)
14 wis (6pts)
14 cha (10pts)


...or just use the same PB as Human and get 18 Str and 12 cha. Not a huge deal either way.

[navar100]

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.)

The point is it is irrelevant how awesome a human paladin in Pathfinder would be. Let it be so that a human paladin in Pathfinder is so Awesome, Huzzah, Hip Hip Hooray, Go! Go! Go!, Absolutely the best in everything everywhere for all time forever and ever. If despite all that oh so great grand poobah of awesomeness a player wants to play a half-orc paladin anyway the game mechanics of a Pathfinder half-orc paladin do not suck for him. His Righteous Do Goodism of Delicious Paladin POWER may not be as grand as could have been possible as a human, but the player doesn't care because his half-orc paladin is still juicy in its own rite. He doesn't have to be the Best Paladin EVAR! He just needs to be an effective one, which he can do as a half-orc in Paladin easier than he could as a half-orc in 3E.

[sonofzeal]

The point is it is irrelevant how awesome a human paladin in Pathfinder would be. Let it be so that a human paladin in Pathfinder is so Awesome, Huzzah, Hip Hip Hooray, Go! Go! Go!, Absolutely the best in everything everywhere for all time forever and ever. If despite all that oh so great grand poobah of awesomeness a player wants to play a half-orc paladin anyway the game mechanics of a Pathfinder half-orc paladin do not suck for him. His Righteous Do Goodism of Delicious Paladin POWER may not be as grand as could have been possible as a human, but the player doesn't care because his half-orc paladin is still juicy in its own rite. He doesn't have to be the Best Paladin EVAR! He just needs to be an effective one, which he can do as a half-orc in Paladin easier than he could as a half-orc in 3E.

Oh, he's certainly welcome to be a Half-Orc despite better options. But he was perfectly able to do that in 3.5 too. I'm still not seeing the point.

[Psyren]

Oh, he's certainly welcome to be a Half-Orc despite better options. But he was perfectly able to do that in 3.5 too. I'm still not seeing the point.

He was fighting uphill in 3.5.
He doesn't have to in PF.

I really can't state it any more clearly than that.

[KnightDisciple]

He was fighting uphill in 3.5.
He doesn't have to in PF.

I really can't state it any more clearly than that.

This.

I'd add that I'm currently playing a Half-Orc fighter...who's a dedicated archer. And thanks to some good rolls, he's got a 12 in Charisma.

Seriously, the dynamic of giving all the half-races the floating +2 is a good one. It represents the general flexibility they possess. Meanwhile, each of them has some very good advantages (HO darkvision, HE immunities, etc.).

Humans still get a free feat, so it's not like they aren't "top dogs" still.

[sonofzeal]

He was fighting uphill in 3.5.
He doesn't have to in PF.

I really can't state it any more clearly than that.

If only because PF as a whole is generally playing with kid gloves, given the buffs PCs got and (apparently) the nerfs monsters got. Everything got easier for everyone, so things are obviously easier for Mr Halforc Paladin too. Is that your sales-pitch for the system, that PCs are stronger and monsters are weaker?

[KnightDisciple]

If only because PF as a whole is generally playing with kid gloves, given the buffs PCs got and (apparently) the nerfs monsters got. Everything got easier for everyone, so things are obviously easier for Mr Halforc Paladin too. Is that your sales-pitch for the system, that PCs are stronger and monsters are weaker?

Is that really such a bad thing, that Paladins got a buff, and the legions of monsters with abilities that instantly removed players from being able to contribute to the game (via save-or-die, save-or-suck, etc) got nerfed?

Is it really so bad that people can more easily play a wider range of options for character ideas now?

How is "everything got easier" a bad sales pitch?

Incidentally, it's not like Paladins, Fighters, or the rest of their ilk can still compete with Wizards and their ilk. So it's still pretty close to 3.5.

[LordBlades]

The point is it is irrelevant how awesome a human paladin in Pathfinder would be. Let it be so that a human paladin in Pathfinder is so Awesome, Huzzah, Hip Hip Hooray, Go! Go! Go!, Absolutely the best in everything everywhere for all time forever and ever. If despite all that oh so great grand poobah of awesomeness a player wants to play a half-orc paladin anyway the game mechanics of a Pathfinder half-orc paladin do not suck for him. His Righteous Do Goodism of Delicious Paladin POWER may not be as grand as could have been possible as a human, but the player doesn't care because his half-orc paladin is still juicy in its own rite. He doesn't have to be the Best Paladin EVAR! He just needs to be an effective one, which he can do as a half-orc in Paladin easier than he could as a half-orc in 3E.

He's still going to be a worse paladin compared to the 'benchmark human PF paladin' than a 3.5 half orc paladin would be compared to his 'benchmark 3.5 human paladin' counterpart.

As for effectiveness, effective relative to what?

His other party members? That's as relative as ever. If the rest of your party is something like 3x optimized wizards you're going to be sidelined with equal ease in 3.5 as well in PF.

Effectiveness relative to monsters? Well, PF buffed pretty much all races while keeping the monsters largely the same (or nerfing them) Does this mean the half-orc paladin has an easier time? Yes, but then so does everybody else. In order to classify a half-orc paladin as 'effective' or not you'd need to answer the following question: does he have an easier/tougher time facing challenges compared to the 'average human paladin' in 3.5 than in PF?

[Psyren]

Is that your sales-pitch for the system, that PCs are stronger and monsters are weaker?

"Easier to play?" Hell yeah, that's my sales pitch.

It's easy to make encounters more challenging. Use tougher monsters. Add more monsters. Add terrain disadvantages. Reduce visibility. Attack the party while they're asleep. Counter their strengths, play to their weaknesses.

"Kid gloves" as you put them - that's actually the hard part. Making something they're supposed to beat, yet keeping it from being a cakewalk.

Now I can throw a troll at them without thinking "crap, the wizard is out of spells, how do they kill it for good?" Or a vampire without saying "The Paladin has one smite left, what if he misses?" Or a mummy without saying "they have no cleric, who will remove the curse?"

Effectiveness relative to monsters? Well, PF buffed pretty much all races while keeping the monsters largely the same (or nerfing them) Does this mean the half-orc paladin has an easier time? Yes, but then so does everybody else.

Who cares? I'm not playing "everybody else." I'm playing my half-orc paladin.

[Sillycomic]

As for effectiveness, effective relative to what?

He already answered that. The effectiveness is in relation to a 3.5 half-orc paladin. Pathfinder half orcs make more effective paladins than 3.5 half orcs.

This:

In order to classify a half-orc paladin as 'effective' or not you'd need to answer the following question: does he have an easier/tougher time facing challenges compared to the 'average human paladin' in 3.5 than in PF?

Is an entirely different question. One that no one argued (as far as I can see) If that is your definition, then the half orc paladin is by no means effective. If you wanted to play a paladin, the most effective way to do it would be human.

However, if you wanted to play a paladin and be a half orc... 3.5 would punish you and make you have to work very hard to overcome the obvious obstables in your way to make this an effective character.

Pathfinder would give you viable options as a half orc to play a paladin including:

1. No penalties to important stats.
2. +2 ability bonus to any stat you feel your Half orc paladin needs (maybe STR, or CHA, or CON... your choice!)
3. Paladin can be your favorite class, giving you bonus HP or skillpoints!
4. +2 to intimidate! With CHA important for a paladin, this could become one of your best skills in the game.
5. Orc Ferocity gives a half-orc a single more round of fighting after he hits negative hitpoints! This means if he goes below zero he can use a lay on hands on himself and still keep fighting without the aid of healers!
6. Already proficient with an exotic weapon (orc double axe) No wasted exotic proficiency feat if that's what you want your half orc paladin to wield.
7. There are a number of in game alternatives which add lots of bonuses to the half orc paladin including Gate Crasher (+2 to STR checks and sunder attemps to break objects) or Sacred Tattoo (+1 to all saves)

[sonofzeal]

Is that really such a bad thing, that Paladins got a buff, and the legions of monsters with abilities that instantly removed players from being able to contribute to the game (via save-or-die, save-or-suck, etc) got nerfed?

Nerfage of SoD/SoL would indeed be a good thing. The only one I checked was Basilisk, and that does the same thing but the PF DC is higher.

Is it really so bad that people can more easily play a wider range of options for character ideas now?

Certainly, but I dispute that Half-Orc Paladin is a good example of that. Half-Orc Sorcerer maybe, but I'm not sure there was much demand for that.

How is "everything got easier" a bad sales pitch?

It's not like parties I've seen wipe frequently. Is that what they thought the "problem" with 3.5 was? Is PF marketted to people who wipe frequently in 3.5?

[LordBlades]

He already answered that. The effectiveness is in relation to a 3.5 half-orc paladin. Pathfinder half orcs make more effective paladins than 3.5 half orcs.

This:



Is an entirely different question. One that no one argued (as far as I can see) If that is your definition, then the half orc paladin is by no means effective. If you wanted to play a paladin, the most effective way to do it would be human.

However, if you wanted to play a paladin and be a half orc... 3.5 would punish you and make you have to work very hard to overcome the obvious obstables in your way to make this an effective character.

Pathfinder would give you viable options as a half orc to play a paladin including:

1. No penalties to important stats.
2. +2 ability bonus to any stat you feel your Half orc paladin needs (maybe STR, or CHA, or CON... your choice!)
3. Paladin can be your favorite class, giving you bonus HP or skillpoints!
4. +2 to intimidate! With CHA important for a paladin, this could become one of your best skills in the game.
5. Orc Ferocity gives a half-orc a single more round of fighting after he hits negative hitpoints! This means if he goes below zero he can use a lay on hands on himself and still keep fighting without the aid of healers!
6. Already proficient with an exotic weapon (orc double axe) No wasted exotic proficiency feat if that's what you want your half orc paladin to wield.
7. There are a number of in game alternatives which add lots of bonuses to the half orc paladin including Gate Crasher (+2 to STR checks and sunder attemps to break objects) or Sacred Tattoo (+1 to all saves)

Let's see:

3.5 half-orc paladin has: +2 str (your main stat, only core race that gives that so out of all core race paladins, you will probably have the highest to-hit), access to racial substitution levels in Races of destiny and some other misc bonuses like darkvision and orc double axe as martial (lol @ TWF paladins though). For that you pay the price of a -2 cha(int is a dump stat for most paladins, and 6 int gives the same number of SP as 8 int).

PF half-orc paladin has a +2 to a stat of his choice (just like everybody else), some favorite class bonuses (just like everybody else), and ferocity (which imho it's not that useful past early levels, when damage you receive in a round starts going over 20-30, that 9 HP range in which ferocity works will start to prove rather small).

The PF half-orc might make a better paladin than the 3.5 half-orc, but with the amount of boosts other stuff got, I feel he's further behind the power curve than a 3.5 half-orc paladin would be.

[Sillycomic]

3.5 half-orc paladin has: +2 str (your main stat, only core race that gives that so out of all core race paladins, you will probably have the highest to-hit), access to racial substitution levels in Races of destiny and some other misc bonuses like darkvision and orc double axe as martial (lol @ TWF paladins though). For that you pay the price of a -2 cha(int is a dump stat for most paladins, and 6 int gives the same number of SP as 8 int).

So yes the 3.5 half orc paladin does get some cool things, but at a price of (-2 CHA) It's a shame there wasn't a character out there that you could play which had all of these cool things but with no price to pay at all.... oh wait, there is! Pathfinder Half orc Paladin!

Cool, thanks Paizo!

And a pathfinder half orc can also make paladin a favored class.

Plus the other bonuses, which I understand you feel aren't amazing are clearly bonuses that the Pathfinder half orc can get which a 3.5 half orc can't. You can say Orc Ferocity isn't that useful after low levels, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a bonus and useful during those low levels.

I am a little puzzled.

You say the pathfinder half orc paladin is better than the 3.5 half orc paladin.

But then you state... because of "boosts to other stuff" the half orc paladin is actually further behind than the 3.5 paladin?

First of all, I have no clue what "boosts to other stuff" means. What boosts, to what stuff?

Secondly, if the PF Half orc paladin is better than the 3.5 half orc paladin, then how is he further behind? Can you be better and further behind at the same time?

[LordBlades]

So yes the 3.5 half orc paladin does get some cool things, but at a price of (-2 CHA) It's a shame there wasn't a character out there that you could play which had all of these cool things but with no price to pay at all.... oh wait, there is! Half orc Paladin!

Half orc paladin in 3.5 does some cool stuff for a price. Half-orc paladin in PF does less cool stuff for less cost(+2 str is way cooler when nobody else has it).

You say the pathfinder half orc paladin is better than the 3.5 half orc paladin.

But then you state... because of "boosts to other stuff" the half orc paladin is actually further behind than the 3.5 paladin?

First of all, I have no clue what "boosts to other stuff" means. What boosts, to what stuff?

Secondly, if the PF Half orc paladin is better than the 3.5 half orc paladin, then how is he further behind? Can you be better and further behind at the same time?

Put side by side, PF half-orc paladin probably looks better than 3.5 half-orc paladin(that's what I meant by better). However, in practice(3.P notwithstanding), the 3.5 paladin will be in a 3.5 game, playing alongside 3.5 races/classes, whereas the PF paladin will do the same in a PF game. And given how PF races are setup, I feel you're doing yourself a greater disservice by going half-orc over human in PF than you do in 3.5.

[Psyren]

Nerfage of SoD/SoL would indeed be a good thing. The only one I checked was Basilisk, and that does the same thing but the PF DC is higher.

Wrong again; the part about thawing them out with its blood is not in 3.5. If you kill the PF basilisk, you can undo the effect of its gaze on up to 3 of your party members immediately. In 3.5, you get to eat sh find a cleric, or adorn your garden.

Certainly, but I dispute that Half-Orc Paladin is a good example of that. Half-Orc Sorcerer maybe, but I'm not sure there was much demand for that.

1) You have no way of knowing demand for anything.
2) Any lack of demand would have been due to it being a terrible combination mechanically, not necessarily due to a lack of player desire. Or are you saying wizards make more sense for them? Bards? Or maybe they have no arcanists at all/no players that conceived of them?

It's not like parties I've seen wipe frequently. Is that what they thought the "problem" with 3.5 was? Is PF marketted to people who wipe frequently in 3.5?

It's marketed to people who got fed up with pass-fail mechanics back in 1e.

[Sillycomic]

Ahh, I see. Ok then, again I don't disagree with you. The most effective paladin is and always will be a human.

I just feel like that's a non-issue because, no one has argued any differently. At no point was the argument about what race makes a more effective paladin, simply what version of what race is more effective.

So, I guess we can both be right.

Humans make better paladins.

Pathfinder half orcs look and are better at being a paladin than 3.5 half orcs.

Neither of those statements contradict the other.

[Doc Roc]

So I normally wouldn't do this... but... Legend is, you know, free? Like actually free, not just SRD'd? And if you want, you can help us save Christmas.

[sonofzeal]

So I normally wouldn't do this... but... Legend is, you know, free? Like actually free, not just SRD'd? And if you want, you can help us save Christmas.

What's the sales pitch on Legend? What will converting do for me, besides save Christmas?

[Psyren]

So I normally wouldn't do this... but... Legend is, you know, free? Like actually free, not just SRD'd? And if you want, you can help us save Christmas.

Pitch of Opportunity?

[sonofzeal]

Pitch of Opportunity?

Doc Roc clearly has the Sales Reflexes feat....

It's marketed to people who got fed up with pass-fail mechanics back in 1e.

That's... actually not a bad argument. Can you substantiate it?

[navar100]

I am a little puzzled.

You say the pathfinder half orc paladin is better than the 3.5 half orc paladin.

But then you state... because of "boosts to other stuff" the half orc paladin is actually further behind than the 3.5 paladin?

First of all, I have no clue what "boosts to other stuff" means. What boosts, to what stuff?

Secondly, if the PF Half orc paladin is better than the 3.5 half orc paladin, then how is he further behind? Can you be better and further behind at the same time?

He means that even though Pathfinder half-orc paladin is stronger than a 3.5 half-orc paladin, the power difference between a Pathfinder human paladin and a Pathfinder half-orc paladin is larger than the power difference between a 3.5 human paladin and a 3.5 half-orc paladin.

The logic behind the argument is players should play the most optimal character as possible. Since a Pathfinder human paladin gets much better stuff than a Pathfinder half-orc paladin, you are The Stupid for choosing to be a Pathfinder half-orc paladin. Because the Pathfinder half-orc paladin is much weaker than a Pathfinder human paladin compared to a 3.5 half-orc paladin being weaker than a 3.5 human paladin, in Pathfinder you're more The Stupid for choosing to play a half-orc paladin than you would be if you were playing 3.5.

I find that argument to be The Stupid, but it's by the same people who think it's stupid for a spellcaster to cast a buff spell on the Fighter. If your character is not Mary Poppins ("Practically perfect in every way") then you're The Suck, a drain on party resources; go away.

[Flickerdart]

I find that argument to be The Stupid, but it's by the same people who think it's stupid for a spellcaster to cast a buff spell on the Fighter. If your character is not Mary Poppins ("Practically perfect in every way") then you're The Suck, a drain on party resources; go away.

Hello sir, welcome to the Hyperbole Hotel, here's your room key. I have never seen a less accurate description of optimization than this one.

It is not The Stupid for a wizard to buff his buddy; the buff makes the party more powerful as a whole. It is, however, The Stupid for a person to build a fighter with the expectation that his buddy wizard's goodwill will turn him from a pillow with a face into a competent party member. Buffs are a supplement to your character's skill, they should not be your primary means of accomplishing anything at all.

[Sunken Valley]

Pathfinder>3.5

This is because not only are there less books to constantly carry around (due to stuff being on PRD) but also Paizo doesn't vomit books of poor quality constantly like wizards did. Pathfinder is consistently good quality. It is also funner to play because less dead levels.

Don't use the SRD. It's poorly edited.

Also, Pathfinder bases its product line on a renewable product. Adventure paths. So it won't mess you around like 3.5 and 4e.

[Tyndmyr]

"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?

The question at hand is not "are pc races better compared to monsters"

It's "is the gap between humans and half orcs smaller in PF"?

This requires three steps.
A. analyze the difference in 3.5
B. analyze the difference in PF.
C. Compare the differences.

Since both humans and half orcs get a +2 to any stat, B does not in any way have a larger difference as a result. Since both 3.5 and PF have such things as darkvision for half orcs, there is no difference in C from that.

But...since you asked, yes, many monsters WERE beefed up. More importantly, it's still fairly common to fight enemies that use PC classes. So, it tends to be just a numbers inflation all round. That mostly means only that the math is slightly more involved(meh), but it has some unfortunate knock on effects. For example, unoptimized blasting tends to be a bit weaker in PF because base spell damage is the same and hp tends to be higher. This is a negative effect.

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.

And you have entirely ignored the alternate racial features of human. Human's racial features are extremely good, and they have a far better selection of alternate favored class boosts than half orc does.

This means that, in step B above, humans are relatively better than half orc in PF.

"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.

Er, they are not taking warforged just to get it. The natural attack is a footnote on the awesomeness that is warforged. It's situationally useful, sure...but it's the array of other things it is taken for.

bludgeoning damage? As a melee char? Pick up a club. It's free, and it does more damage.

Feats or PrCs? For a half orc paladin in PF that require a bite attack? Feel free to list them, because I honestly can't think of a single one that makes your point.

"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.

See the list above.

Adding a +2 to everyone is inflationary. Now, if inflation is good or bad...meh. Depends on the circumstance. But it most certainly does not fix imbalances between the races.

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.

Wait what? Nah. In 3.5 you just beat him into the ground in the normal fashion then CdG. Repeat until save is failed. It's really not hard at all.

He means that even though Pathfinder half-orc paladin is stronger than a 3.5 half-orc paladin, the power difference between a Pathfinder human paladin and a Pathfinder half-orc paladin is larger than the power difference between a 3.5 human paladin and a 3.5 half-orc paladin.

This is correct.

The logic behind the argument is players should play the most optimal character as possible. Since a Pathfinder human paladin gets much better stuff than a Pathfinder half-orc paladin, you are The Stupid for choosing to be a Pathfinder half-orc paladin. Because the Pathfinder half-orc paladin is much weaker than a Pathfinder human paladin compared to a 3.5 half-orc paladin being weaker than a 3.5 human paladin, in Pathfinder you're more The Stupid for choosing to play a half-orc paladin than you would be if you were playing 3.5.

I find that argument to be The Stupid, but it's by the same people who think it's stupid for a spellcaster to cast a buff spell on the Fighter. If your character is not Mary Poppins ("Practically perfect in every way") then you're The Suck, a drain on party resources; go away.

That's....not what I said at all.

No, Psyren claimed that PF had made non-human and unpopular races more attractive.

I merely provided examples that they have not.

This:
Is an entirely different question. One that no one argued (as far as I can see) If that is your definition, then the half orc paladin is by no means effective. If you wanted to play a paladin, the most effective way to do it would be human.

However, if you wanted to play a paladin and be a half orc... 3.5 would punish you and make you have to work very hard to overcome the obvious obstables in your way to make this an effective character.

Pathfinder would give you viable options as a half orc to play a paladin including:

1. No penalties to important stats.

The ability to trade one stat for another is an important part of racial differentiation in 3.5. You're losing choice, not gaining it.

2. +2 ability bonus to any stat you feel your Half orc paladin needs (maybe STR, or CHA, or CON... your choice!)

Everyone gets this. Meh.

3. Paladin can be your favorite class, giving you bonus HP or skillpoints!

Again, everyone gets this. Oh look, humans get this AND alternative options too.

[quote]4. +2 to intimidate! With CHA important for a paladin, this could become one of your best skills in the game. [quote]

In PF, intimidate is not a paladin class skill. It's probably not great.

5. Orc Ferocity gives a half-orc a single more round of fighting after he hits negative hitpoints! This means if he goes below zero he can use a lay on hands on himself and still keep fighting without the aid of healers!

Humans have an Alt racial feature that crushes this in terms of staying alive. They ditch their extra skill points(which we haven't even bothered including mostly until now) and look even more awesome than half orcs. Or, they could swap that for a list of other abilities.

6. Already proficient with an exotic weapon (orc double axe) No wasted exotic proficiency feat if that's what you want your half orc paladin to wield.

On the bright side, if effectiveness is not a criteria, you don't need an EWP at all to wield a weapon!

And seriously, if you picked orc double axe as your weapon, effectiveness is probably not that important to you.

7. There are a number of in game alternatives which add lots of bonuses to the half orc paladin including Gate Crasher (+2 to STR checks and sunder attemps to break objects) or Sacred Tattoo (+1 to all saves)

All of these replace existing benefits. And seriously, +2 to breaking objects/sundering is...weak.

Imagine if the human had taken Improved Sunder instead with his extra feat. Not only would he get the +2 to breaking objects, he'd get +2 to defending his objects as well. Oh, and he'd also get to skip the whole AoO thing while sundering.

No, this is a very poor choice, even if a build based around smashing apart potential loot was a good idea.

[Psyren]

That's... actually not a bad argument. Can you substantiate it?

Easily; that's the same market 3e had. One need only look at the updated Tomb of Horrors to see how drastically the game's design philosophy changed since the earlier editions regarding insta-gib challenges.

PF simply took it a step further, because 3.5 still had plenty, allowing rocket tag to dominate the game even at mid-levels. Your Basilisk example for instance - if the 3.5 party's cleric gets stoned, the DM has to roll up his sleeves and throw them a bone or they're screwed. Or negative levels - instant spellcaster screw in 3.5 (as they lose their biggest guns first) yet in PF, they remain harmful without being the insurmountable obstacles they are now.

Now, I'm not saying that PF doesn't have pass-fail mechanics still, but it certainly has less than 3.5. Combined with buffing PCs and nerfing monsters (which, as I explained previously, doesn't morph the game into easymode since the DM has multiple ways to increase difficulty), and the odds of your PC biting it to random chance are much lower.

Now the players who want random chance to be able to wipe their party? They have OSRIC and CoC and all sorts of other games to feel nice and powerless in. Pathfinder is not one of them.


@Tyndmyr: Humans are not Half-Orcs. PF Humans being better at X than PF Half-Orcs has no bearing on PF Half-Orcs being better at X than 3.5 Half-Orcs, so I'm not going to bother continuing beating my head against that brick wall. If you refuse to see it, fine.

[Tyndmyr]

@Tyndmyr: Humans are not Half-Orcs. PF Humans being better at X than PF Half-Orcs has no bearing on PF Half-Orcs being better at X than 3.5 Half-Orcs, so I'm not going to bother continuing beating my head against that brick wall. If you refuse to see it, fine.

But...that statement does not at all support your original statement of

By setting the balance point for races higher, you encourage more diversity at the table, which leads to richer games.

So, you haven't actually shown anything to support PF here. Humans are still a ton better than half orcs, so you still lack diversity.

[Psyren]

So, you haven't actually shown anything to support PF here. Humans are still a ton better than half orcs, so you still lack diversity.

Sure I have, you just haven't been reading. You are no longer arbitrarily punished by the system for playing certain race-class combinations. Your half-orc sorcerer, for instance, can start off better than or even just on par with an Elven one (as opposed to being automatically disadvantaged like he used to.) This encourages players to try those combinations that were previously deemed unworthy on a systemic level. Diversity.

Hell, even WotC actively tried to discourage the players. From Races of Destiny:

Sorcerer: Half-orcs do not make good sorcerers. The class depends on Charisma to succeed, and that is typically a half-orc’s weakest ability.

Humans are still better, but I can be a non-human without feeling like I'm fighting an uphill battle. Why is this so hard to grasp? Navar and comic got it.

[Tyndmyr]

Sure I have, you just haven't been reading. You are no longer arbitrarily punished by the system for playing certain race-class combinations. Your half-orc sorcerer, for instance, can start off better than or even just on par with an Elven one (as opposed to being automatically disadvantaged like he used to.) This encourages players to try those combinations that were previously deemed unworthy on a systemic level. Diversity.

Pfft, by far the best race for Sorc is Human. So, not at all sir. That does not encourage diversity. Elves were not the iconic sorcerer race in either system.

It just happens that humans get a lot more awesome stuff in PF, so again, they're better than BOTH races in comparison by an even wider margin.

Hell, even WotC actively tried to discourage the players. From Races of Destiny:

Humans are still better, but I can be a non-human without feeling like I'm fighting an uphill battle. Why is this so hard to grasp? Navar and comic got it.

You might FEEL that way, but there isn't actually a difference. I suspect you're attaching some sort of psychological importance to negative numbers.

The straight human sorc gets about twice as many spells known, has the same primary stat as yer half-orc sorc and the same secondary stats. And also a free feat.

He is positively filled with win. So, no, your non-human IS fighting an uphill battle to maintain parity.

[Helldog]

Navar and comic got it.

Me too! *raises both hands*

[Psyren]

Pfft, by far the best race for Sorc is Human. So, not at all sir. That does not encourage diversity. Elves were not the iconic sorcerer race in either system.

It just happens that humans get a lot more awesome stuff in PF, so again, they're better than BOTH races in comparison by an even wider margin.

Which is irrelevant if I don't want to be human.
If I didn't want to be human in 3.5, I got to eat a nice steaming pile of... mediocre.

You might FEEL that way, but there isn't actually a difference. I suspect you're attaching some sort of psychological importance to negative numbers.

If by "psychological" you mean "mathematical" then yes.

"Parity" was never the goal, otherwise we'd all be Pun-Pun just to be competitive. You might enjoy that game but I don't.