Pathfinder and 3.5 Classes in the Same Game--Balanced?

[Amaril]

Suppose I wanted to run a 3.5 game, but wanted to change up some of the available classes to fit with the setting better. For example, let's say that because of the way my magic system worked, I wanted to add the witch class from Pathfinder as an available choice, but keep the other classes as their 3.5 versions rather than using the Pathfinder ones. Ignoring any balance problems between classes within either system, would a class list composed of classes from both Pathfinder and 3.5 like this be balanced between the two systems? I know Pathfinder classes get more class features in general, so I want to confirm whether this is an okay thing to do.

[deuxhero]

No, but this is entirely because neither 3.5 nor PF was even remotely balanced.

As for just dropping Witch into 3.5, there's two things you need to be aware of: Slumber/ice tomb and spell list.

Slumber and Ice Tomb are reusable save or die effects and pretty nasty. There are ways around them (multiple opponents, undead, elfs, half elfs, mind immune), but as a GM they can be pretty annoying to deal with because of how much they shut down so effectively.

Spell list is simply that none of the many non-core 3.5 spells are on the Witch's spell list, and all the witch only spells are PF only. You'll have to manually add to the Witch's list yourself and backport spells to make them anything but an inferior wizard.

[Amaril]

No, but this is entirely because neither 3.5 nor PF was even remotely balanced.

Okay, yes, I realize that, I'm just wondering whether any given Pathfinder class added into the 3.5 list would automatically be overpowered purely by virtue of being a Pathfinder class. Sounds like you're saying not, though.

As for just dropping Witch into 3.5, there's two things you need to be aware of: Slumber/ice tomb and spell list.

Slumber and Ice Tomb are reusable save or die effects and pretty nasty. There are ways around them (multiple opponents, undead, elfs, half elfs, mind immune), but as a GM they can be pretty annoying to deal with because of how much they shut down so effectively.

Spell list is simply that none of the many non-core 3.5 spells are on the Witch's spell list, and all the witch only spells are PF only. You'll have to manually add to the Witch's list yourself and backport spells to make them anything but an inferior wizard.

Alright, for the sake of simplicity here, let's assume first that this would be restricted to content from the 3.5 PHB, plus the witch class entry and spell list from the Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide. Ice tomb can be ignored for now, and I don't see too much of a problem with slumber. Regarding the spell list, do you have any advice on how to go about that? I know some of those spells originally had versions in 3.5 that were changed in Pathfinder--should I keep those spells on the list, but have players use the 3.5 versions, or should I update them to Pathfinder for all classes that have them? Can I safely backport the new spells into 3.5, or will that mess things up?

Also, let's say for the moment at least that the witch would be replacing the wizard class in this situation, leaving sorcerers as the only other full arcane casters. I don't know if that'll matter, but if I do end up doing this, that's probably what'll happen.

[eggynack]

Okay, yes, I realize that, I'm just wondering whether any given Pathfinder class added into the 3.5 list would automatically be overpowered purely by virtue of being a Pathfinder class. Sounds like you're saying not, though.

That is indeed technically the case, as the high end for 3.5 is probably higher than the high end for PF, or at least comparable to it. More importantly, even if there is some slight imbalance, it's much smaller than the imbalance that already exists. You have much more to fear from sticking a monk from either system up against a 3.5 druid than you do from sticking a 3.5 druid up against whatever represents the highest end tier one in PF.

[ThisIsZen]

It depends on what op end your party plays. Pathfinder classes are much stronger at their optimization floor - it's hard to make PF characters who are actively unplayable. However, if your party is familiar with high-op play, then without integrating PF classes into 3.x properly, the PF classes will probably end up actually falling behind, simply because 3.x's optimization ceiling is higher (infinitely higher, actually, since infinite power is a possibility) than PF's is.

So if you do the legwork to make certain that the Witch's spell list is integrated properly with the rest of the arcane casters in your world, and likewise with any other class you want to backport in terms of features, everything should work fine.

(I think PF's martial classes may actually win out overall here except against things like Tome of Battle (disregarding the existence of Path of War for a moment). They would get access to all of the same feats and such as 3.x martials, which is what they want, while still keeping all of the goodies for being PF classes. I don't think this would make them overwhelmingly powerful, mind, but at a quick glance I think backporting makes PF martials very happy.)

[Gemini476]

Just make sure that you do the right things in backporting the Witch, like adding in Concentration and splitting skills again and maybe also lowering the size of the hit die a bit.

The Witch is not as good as the best 3.5 classes but probably still Tier 1 even with the (relatively) small spell list.

3.5 is already broke and you're not going to break it much further by adding in classes from Pathfinder unless said classes are even more broke than the core 3.5 classes can be (which is hard, and as far as I know not really the case for Paizo classes.)


...Unless you add something like the Arcanist and let him have access to the 3.5 Wiz/Sorc spell list, I guess. That would probably be a pretty bad idea.

[tyriuth]

Suppose I wanted to run a 3.5 game, but wanted to change up some of the available classes to fit with the setting better. For example, let's say that because of the way my magic system worked, I wanted to add the witch class from Pathfinder as an available choice, but keep the other classes as their 3.5 versions rather than using the Pathfinder ones. Ignoring any balance problems between classes within either system, would a class list composed of classes from both Pathfinder and 3.5 like this be balanced between the two systems? I know Pathfinder classes get more class features in general, so I want to confirm whether this is an okay thing to do.

I would have to say that it depends entirely on the power level of the campaign you were running, and what classes you were adding over. Personally I play 3.5, but my house rules (which are about 8 typed pages long ) include a lot of the stuff that pathfinder has as default. Of which; the Fighter and Warlock are of the pathfinder versions.

A class list composed of both systems wouldn't be too broken in my opinion, at least not significantly more than 3.5 is already. I've not played a huge amount of pathfinder, but from what I have seen; the majority of the power boost is to the lower tier classes from 3.5 (paladin, fighter, rogue, warlock) and the casters have retained a some-what similar power level (It was hard for them to get much better...), and the inclusion of the pathfinder classes would likely just mean that those players still playing 3.5 classes may feel a little less powerful compared to their pathfinder companions.

Though I would be more inclined to add the classes you like from 3.5, which have no pathfinder equivalent (Beguiler for me) to the pathfinder list and play pathfinder.

[emeraldstreak]

Look out for the Witch and the Summoner. They aren't higher than the strongest 3.5 classes by any means, but they are very easy to build to overpowered-ness very early.