New to PF, 3.5 vet

[AnimeTheCat]

So, what all is the difference really? I mean mechanically. Like PF has CMB and CMD, and if I read correctly CMB seems like it replaces BAB on the offense and CMD is like BAB on the defensive. So, for Trip attempts it would be CMB+str vs CMD+Str/dex right? Did I read that right?

Also, what the heck are archetypes? When do you select them? Are they just like ACFs for 3.5 base classes?

How do the favored class bonuses work exactly? If I read properly, the bonuses are based off of levels in that class. So half orc alchemists get +1 bomb damage every 2 alchemist levels right? And a half orc barbarian gets an extra round of rage each class level?

What other general mechanical type differences are there between PF and 3.5? Just some brief help or guides would be nice.

[Resileaf]

You are right on the CMB/CMD thing. It streamlines the combat maneuver rules (especially the dreaded grappling rules) into easier-to-remember numbers.

Archetypes are small modifications to a class that gives it a certain flavor. You choose (or don't) your archetype when you pick up the class, and replace any class feature that the archetype affects.

The bonuses indeed work the way you've stated. They only affect your favored class, which would be your first class. The favored class bonus can also be a hit point or a skill rank (you choose your bonus upon leveling up).

There very much are no other differences (that I know of). Pathfinder is called D&D 3.75 for a reason. See it more as an expansion pack than as a whole new game.

[BowStreetRunner]

The skill system got a nice overhaul.

Maximum skill ranks are equal to your level now, regardless of whether the skill is a class skill or not. No more 4x skill ranks at first level. Instead, if you take a rank in a class skill, you get a +3 bonus to that skill.

Also, a bunch of skills got rolled up into a smaller number of skills. So Listen, Spot and Search are all now just Perception. Hide and Move Silently are now just Stealth. A bunch more got rolled up like this too, so the skill ranks per level being unchanged (Rogue still gets 8 ranks + your Intelligence bonus, etc.) that means your skill ranks tend to go a bit further now.

[SangoProduction]

Don't forget that they designed PF to be basically a single-class system, although they technically leave it open for you to multiclass. The prestige classes are consequently nerfed to hell and back so that you aren't tempted to leave your class, with very few exceptions.

Also, they tried to cut the power of some spells.

[KillianHawkeye]

Like PF has CMB and CMD, and if I read correctly CMB seems like it replaces BAB on the offense and CMD is like BAB on the defensive. So, for Trip attempts it would be CMB+str vs CMD+Str/dex right? Did I read that right?

That's close. Your CMB already includes stuff like BAB, Strength, and size bonuses. Likewise, your CMD already includes BAB, Strength AND Dexterity, and whatever else you have going into it (like deflection, dodge, or a few other types of AC bonuses). These should pretty much be fixed values during play, unless you have something that gives you a bonus on certain combat maneuvers.

You can think of them more like your total attack bonus and AC, but only for stuff like grappling, tripping, disarm, et cetera. Also, note that many combat maneuvers no longer have a separate step for making a touch attack first. You just roll your CMB versus their CMD and carry on with the battle.

Also, what the heck are archetypes? When do you select them? Are they just like ACFs for 3.5 base classes?

They're sort of like ACFs, but usually more comprehensive. They're more like complete class variants, and you select them when you take the class. A bit like the variant classes for 3.5 in Unearthed Arcana or the online SRD.

How do the favored class bonuses work exactly? If I read properly, the bonuses are based off of levels in that class. So half orc alchemists get +1 bomb damage every 2 alchemist levels right? And a half orc barbarian gets an extra round of rage each class level?

Favored classes in Pathfinder are chosen on a per-character basis. They're not dictated by your race like in D&D. You get to choose your bonus each time you gain a level in your character's favored class. The options are +1 hp, +1 skill point, or possibly a specific class-related bonus that can vary depending on your race (like the examples you noted).

Your favored class doesn't have to be your first class if you're planning on making a multi-class character, but it's pretty common. Especially considering how the developers have buffed single classes to the point where characters don't need to multi-class the way they did in D&D. Otherwise, you're starting a character and not getting any bonus because you haven't taken your favored class yet.

What other general mechanical type differences are there between PF and 3.5? Just some brief help or guides would be nice.

Mainly just be aware that a lot of the skills, feats, and spells have been rewritten even though many of the names haven't changed.

[gijoemike]

Just because you get a power with the same name, at the same level, from the same class in 3.5 doesn't mean it works anything like it used to. Same goes for a few feats and spells. I don't have a full list, but here are just a few for you to get the idea.

Druid wild shape - Fairly different (polymorph rules in general are). Dumping physical states is a bad idea now.

Pally Smite Evil - completely different. Much better.

Cleave (Feat) - is a totally different mechanic. The feat you are thinking of is now a bit down the feat chain this feat begins.

glitter dust (spell) - a number of differences. save every round.

I made the same mistake of thinking PF was 90% 3.5 and played the fool 1/2 through a number sessions. I skipped over class features because "I know this bit already." I found out mid fight i had no idea how it worked now.

[BowStreetRunner]

Just remembered a couple more.

XP costs for spells and item creation feats are now just gold costs.

Feats are granted at every odd level instead of every third level.

0 level spells are now reusable - you don't expend them when you cast them unlike other spells.

As for the races, classes, feats, spells, monsters, and so forth - you should read each entry carefully. As others have pointed out, just because it has the same name doesn't mean it's the same mechanically.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by BowStreetRunner
...just because it has the same name doesn't mean it's the same mechanically.

So true. There are tiny changes sprinkled throughout, what I call "stealth changes," because they're so easy to overlook. I've been playing PF for several years, and running a campaign for the past couple years, and I'm constantly tripping over this or that alteration that I'd assumed was the same as 3.5, but in fact is completely different. Short of reading the entire CRB, I'm not sure how you can catch them all beforehand.

As just one example, barbarians are no longer illiterate by default. Not sure what the designers' reasoning was, but there it is.

[Goaty14]

This.

Pally Smite Evil - completely different. Much better.

NOT A SMITE!!!1! IT ANNOYETH THYSELF TOO MUCH!

Spoiler: Bear with Me: THIS! IS! NOT! A! SMITE!!!! (Very important; read)

Show

So yeah; as you can see, this class feature is just insanely powerful, but there’s a little caveat. Simply put, it’s NOT a smite. A smite is a sudden punishment, one that goes as fast as it comes. Just going with the first definition that comes to mind, definitions such as “to strike down or kill with godly force; to injure with divine power”; the Oxford Dictionary mentions “strike with a firm blow”. A firm blow. Singular, not plural. The Holy Smite spell is a smite; Flame Strike behaves like a smite; a bolt of lightning fulminating an unbeliever is a smite; a single nuclear warhead thrown against an asteroid is a smite. This…isn’t. This is a mark, specifically a “mark of punishment”. You mark the creature (with a swift action), and you punish the creature with multiple blows. The way this class feature behaves is consistent with a mark, not a smite, regardless of how good it is now compared to its pitiful 3.5 predecessor. Ergo, from now on, any references to “smite evil” will be replaced with “mark”, “mark of punishment” or “paladin’s mark”. There will be no friendly reminders, gentlemen. This is the only real petition I ask, because I cringe every time I see the term “smite” used in this way.

[TheFamilarRaven]

Lots of creatures that were immune to precision damage and critical strikes in 3.5 are now ... well, no longer immune to precision damage and critical hits. In other words, undead no longer screw rogues over.

[ericgrau]

You could honestly dive right in knowing 3.5 and you won't really struggle. Read the differences in classes, spells and feats of course as you go. This thread will help for sure, but I mean the thread has already hit something like 90% of the differences that you'll run into.

[MrSandman]

The skill system got a nice overhaul.

Maximum skill ranks are equal to your level now, regardless of whether the skill is a class skill or not. No more 4x skill ranks at first level. Instead, if you take a rank in a class skill, you get a +3 bonus to that skill.

Am I right in reading that it doesn't take 2 skill points to add 1 rank to a non-class skill anymore?

[Azoth]

Am I right in reading that it doesn't take 2 skill points to add 1 rank to a non-class skill anymore?

Correct. Now all skill ranks simply cost one skill point regardless of if it is a class skill or not.

[BowStreetRunner]

Correct. Now all skill ranks simply cost one skill point regardless of if it is a class skill or not.

So the only difference between Class and Cross-Class skills now is that +3 untyped bonus you get from taking at least one rank in a Class skill. This really has two impacts in the game from my experience.

First, since the Class skill advantage is only ever a +3 bonus, taking Cross-Class skills is no longer automatically a losing proposition. It's going to depend as much on your ability score bonus, racial bonuses, and other random bonuses you might receive as to whether you can keep up in a particular skill.

Second, taking that first rank in a class skill is worth a total +4 bonus, so many players will put one rank in every class skill before starting to work on maxing out the skills the want to emphasize. This leads to characters who are more versatile and able to handle the basic tests of their skills much more often. If you've played with a Ranger who couldn't find their way unless the road was well-marked, or a Rogue who managed to steal the crown jewels but then failed his bluff check when questioned about it by an ordinary member of the guard, then you've seen how the all-or-nothing mentality toward optimizing tended to make overly specialized builds more common in 3.5 than generalized ones. Since your biggest bang-for-your-buck is that first rank in Pathfinder, it's more common to find PCs who can tie their own shoes now than it was in D&D.

[Azoth]

You would think that would be the case, but it largely unchanged from the "max it or forget it" philosophy of 3.5. Major skills like Perception, Sense Motive, Stealth, Acrobatics, Bluff/Diplomacy/Intimidate and Knowledges are kind of all or nothing. Just the nature of contested skills or ones that can arbitrarily high DCs.

Acrobatics Vs. CMD to not provoke an AoO.

Knowledges can have DCs of 5+CR, 10+CR, or 15+CR just to know what you are fighting and it's type yet alone anything else of value to help fight it.

Then you have skill prerequisites for feats or PRCs (if you go that route).

So, again you tend to see sheets full of maxed skills and those with no ranks in them.

[Calthropstu]

The differences are vast and many... and minor and subtle all at once.

First thing: Sneak attack works on everything but incorporeal, oozes and elementals. Yes, you can sneak attack a skeleton or an iron golem.

Next: Cmb is your str + bab. Cmd is 10 + bab + str + dex. It sets the dc for people to use combat maneuvers against you.

Numerous spells have changed. Many of the iconic super cheese uses of high level spells have been removed. Some argue it didn't do near enough however.

More feats. All classes get feats at every odd level.

Combat maneuvers are easier to pull off. Grappling a mage into submission takes 2 rounds and significantly hampers them in 1. Freedom of movement is still a thing though.

Summoning was enhanced for non-druid classes. Big time.

Mythic breaks the game in hilariously broken ways.

Polymorphing was altered considerably and is no longer the broken be all strategy it used to be. Shapechange no longer grants special abilities.

A lot of other minor changes as well.

As for archetypes:

Those are taken at 1st level and cannot be changed. Archetypes can completely change the class dynamic replacing class features and abilities with new ones.

[Feantar]

So, what all is the difference really? I mean mechanically. Like PF has CMB and CMD, and if I read correctly CMB seems like it replaces BAB on the offense and CMD is like BAB on the defensive. So, for Trip attempts it would be CMB+str vs CMD+Str/dex right? Did I read that right?

Also, what the heck are archetypes? When do you select them? Are they just like ACFs for 3.5 base classes?

How do the favored class bonuses work exactly? If I read properly, the bonuses are based off of levels in that class. So half orc alchemists get +1 bomb damage every 2 alchemist levels right? And a half orc barbarian gets an extra round of rage each class level?

What other general mechanical type differences are there between PF and 3.5? Just some brief help or guides would be nice.

I am not a PF veteran, but I've played some and here's my impressions on the differences.

From a mechanics standpoint:

• Streamlines combat manoeuvres quite beautifully (see CMD, CMB) to the point that you will not mind initiating grapple checks.
• Culls the skill system mostly adequately (Excluding the super-skill that is Perception, but I generally like it).
• Somewhat ruins character variety (PF generally doesn't do PRCs, and the archetypes who try to replace these are wholly inadequate). Not to the extent that 5th edition did, it is just less than 3.5. This can be easily addressed by doing 3.5 + PF games.
• Removes XP as fuel which is a really good change.
• Makes some changes in spell systems that are completely pointless in the name of balance (See making polymorphing spells kinda sucky in comparison, which makes transmutation less useful, but leaves powerhouses like conjuration alone for... whatever reason).
• Makes XP rewards static - monster blocks have a specific amount of XP given, you don't do any CR calculations except to see how to divide that XP up. Which can cause issues in theory, but in practice is pretty useful if you don't have rules lawyerish players.
• Made races more customisable with the ability to switch racial traits, which is a really awesome thing. They still keep their flavour, but when a race embodies multiple archetypes, you can kinda shift the focus to the one you want.
• Nearly everything is available in the SRD - not just the core mechanics, even 3rd party mechanics are there. This is a good thing.

From a setting standpoint:

Warning: I am not experienced in Golarion's lore, this is just an impression from playing a couple of sessions and a cursory reading.

Golarion is possibly the worst D&D(ish) setting I've seen in my life - oh wait, Kingdoms of Kalamar exists, scratch that. Let's say one of the worst. It is essentially a less internally consistent Forgotten Realms, without the added excuse that it was originally made as multiple settings forced into one (See Al-Qadim shunted into FR for example). It has sci-fi next to typical Medieval Fantasy, next to steampunk, next to western, next to Holy Roman Empire, etc. And these aren't small isolated exceptions, they are full blown nations who are somehow avoiding technological osmosis through... wibbly wobbly, timey wimey stuff I guess?. Verisimilitude is shot out of a canon, through the airlock and into a dragons maw. Can be pleasant if you just pick a nation and consider it part of an unexplored continent which then becomes a setting unto itself. Or maybe making a campaign of the film Cowboys and Aliens.

[tiercel]

You can play either 3.5 or Pathfinder, of course, but asserting that "Pathfinder is just a minor patch on 3.5" is... true on the face of things, but fundamentally misleading.

Basically, for rules and concepts in 3.5 it can be said that "this is in Pathfinder too, except..." -- what feels like almost every single rule. (Then, of course, there are the Pathfinder-only rules...)

Almost everything, even and especially many feats and class features and other rules that have the same name in both editions, works at least a little differently in the two editions. Switching from one to the other, or especially trying to cobble the two together, feels a bit like having to double-check Every. Single. Thing. --because you really, really can't assume that anything in Pathfinder actually works quite the same way as it does in 3.5.

It is really great that so much of Pathfinder is OGL and openly available -- but I really wouldn't want to try to run/play a true 3.P hybrid game, because I don't know if I'd ever keep both versions of all the 3.5 and Pathfinder rules straight. (It would seem there are people who can and have, and more power to them -- but for me it feels like taking all the differences between American English and British English, multiplying them by a couple orders of magnitude, and still calling them "basically the same language.")

[AnimeTheCat]

Regardless of what I end up playing in the upcoming game, i'm a fanatical note card user. I will write down exact tect of feats, spells, skills (these usually in notebooks), etc on note cards for quick reference. Notecards, in alphabetical order, in a note card box in front of me is faster than any laptop, tablet, or phone at the table, and I HATE slowing down the game (hence the thread to augment my own research into the differences).

[Elkad]

Lots of crowd-control stuff is nerfed.

The two big early level examples are Glitterdust and Grease.
Glitterdust gives a new save every round. So unless you serious pump your DCs, stuff will be blind only 2-3 rounds.

Grease doesn't make opponents flat-footed any more (unless they try to move), so no enabling the Rogue.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Feantar
Golarion is possibly the worst D&D(ish) setting I've seen in my life…. Verisimilitude is shot out of a canon, through the airlock and into a dragons maw.

I am so with you on this. Flintlocks and blasters and spiked gauntlets, o my!

Golarion is such a hodgepodge of kitchen sinks that it’s hard to take it seriously as a coherent world. I think it may actually have been multiple settings, back when Paizo was producing material for 3.5, which were then compressed and folded like metamorphic rock into what became the default Pathfinder setting.

I will say it’s very difficult to create a textured world that has both complexity and internal consistency, and all the more so when both magic and technology are stirred into the mix. But Golarion tries to do just about everything, from ancient Egypt to nanotech, and after a certain point it just falls apart as a believable world.

I’ve played in two campaigns set in Golarion—one excellent run of Runelords, and one miserable quagmire in Kingmaker. In both cases the setting was very traditional fantasy, and I have a feeling the GM was simply ignoring the possibilities of high technology altogether, which was fine by me. I know for a fact he cut out firearms, because there were other players in the group who apparently hit the ceiling at the merest mention of gunpowder in a fantasy world.

Personally I don’t mind a fantasy campaign world without muskets, lasers or nanites, but it does mean that the GM is making choices to remove broad swathes of material from the published setting—and while that worked well enough in the campaign arcs I played in, mainly set in Magnimar and the River Kingdoms, eventually those choices may end up having cascading consequences that could get out of control.

[Florian]

I am not experienced in Golarion's lore, this is just an impression from playing a couple of sessions and a cursory reading.

Golarion takes some time to get into, but it´s actually a very good setting once you unterstand the underlying "lore", which is a bit different than, say, the Forgotten Realms and also incorporates the game mechanics in a rather surprising way.

I’ve played in two campaigns set in Golarion—one excellent run of Runelords, and one miserable quagmire in Kingmaker. In both cases the setting was very traditional fantasy, and I have a feeling the GM was simply ignoring the possibilities of high technology altogether, which was fine by me. I know for a fact he cut out firearms, because there were other players in the group who apparently hit the ceiling at the merest mention of gunpowder in a fantasy world.

Same old mistake.

Magic is high tech. What we consider to be technology is basically a joke compared to that.

[Efrate]

Having an android with a blaster, a gnome with a crossbow, a dhamphir with a flintlock, and a dwarf with a battleaxe does strain things. A society of all of any one of them is fine, but in random town x with a population of 50, its very offputting.

Pathfinder devs kind of took everything from nerd culture from the last 40 years and kind of slammed it all in. Little green men, shogguths, dragons, robots, all together.

I recommend reading up on cmb and cmd, and just rereading all you abilities with the same name. Generally you can pop right in as a 3.5 vet and do fine. Deincentivsed multi or prestige classing is the biggest thing to get used to, it is very much worth your while to stay single classed, especially if you choose a reasonable archtype. Note this doesn't stop the horrible npcs in adventure paths being a horrible amalgamation of classes.

[Firest Kathon]

So the only difference between Class and Cross-Class skills now is that +3 untyped bonus you get from taking at least one rank in a Class skill. This really has two impacts in the game from my experience.

First, since the Class skill advantage is only ever a +3 bonus, taking Cross-Class skills is no longer automatically a losing proposition. It's going to depend as much on your ability score bonus, racial bonuses, and other random bonuses you might receive as to whether you can keep up in a particular skill.

Second, taking that first rank in a class skill is worth a total +4 bonus, so many players will put one rank in every class skill before starting to work on maxing out the skills the want to emphasize. This leads to characters who are more versatile and able to handle the basic tests of their skills much more often. If you've played with a Ranger who couldn't find their way unless the road was well-marked, or a Rogue who managed to steal the crown jewels but then failed his bluff check when questioned about it by an ordinary member of the guard, then you've seen how the all-or-nothing mentality toward optimizing tended to make overly specialized builds more common in 3.5 than generalized ones. Since your biggest bang-for-your-buck is that first rank in Pathfinder, it's more common to find PCs who can tie their own shoes now than it was in D&D.

In addition, many Pathfinder groups use traits, which are supposed to be worth 0.5 feats and you usually get 2 at first level. Many of these traits are "make skill X a class skill, and get a +1 trait bonus", making it effectively a +4 to that skill if it is not already a class skill.

[Kurald Galain]

I'm sure a lot of this has been mentioned already, let me go in brief by class:

• Barbarian - Rage goes in rounds per day instead of uses per day, making it more viable at low level. Barbs get their pick of rage powers, which are special abilities that activate when raging; these include big saving throw bonuses, totem abilities, and (even more) powerful blows. Barbarians can literally destroy spell effects by hitting them really hard.
• Bard - Bardic music also goes in rounds per day. You can cast spells straight from level one. At higher level, you can sing as a move action or swift action. There are numerous special bard songs called masterpieces.
• Cleric - Instead of turning undead, clerics get the ability to heal everyone in a 30' radius as a standard action (or, less interestingly, to harm all undead in that same radius). This means that in-combat healing is actually a viable option now. Various feats exist to boost this further (turn undead being one of them).
• Fighter - Numerous combat bonuses, and they have several archetypes to give them much-needed extra skill points. Fighters get numerous weapon- and armor-related abilities that other classes don't, such as the ability to deflect spells and siege missiles with their weapon.
• Druid - Shapeshifting now adds to your ability scores (e.g. +4 str) instead of overriding them (e.g. set str to 18 regardless of what it was). This means that a 6-str 6-dex druid is no longer viable; it's a nerf but arguably they needed it (and druids are still very strong).
• Rogue - Almost everything that couldn't be sneak attacked in 3E can now be sneak attacked; this fixes the major problem with 3E rogues, they're no longer useless in any combat involving undead or plants or whatnot. The reprinted "unchained" rogue gets dex-to-damage for free, and can apply numerous debuffs on each hit.
• Monk - The "qigong" and "unchained" monks get their pick of ki abilities, which most notably gives them pounce. While still not a great class, monks are actually respectable damage dealers now.
• Paladin - Smite Evil now lasts until end of combat, instead of for a single attack. This makes paladins one of the best damage dealers against anything evil. They can also cure conditions by laying on hands, and can get a divine weapon instead of a steed if they so choose.
• Ranger - Check out the new Hunter class, that gets primal spellcasting straight from level one, a much better animal companion, and a swift action ability that buffs him with various animal aspects.
• Sorcerer - Their magical ability now comes from a specific bloodline (like draconic, or abyssal, etc) and they get specific abilities themed after the bloodline. Notably, this includes extra spells known, fixing the main problem with the 3E sorcerer. A couple of bloodlines add to spell damage, making blasting work well straight out of the box (which in 3E requires quite a bit of optimizing and splat-diving).
• Wizard - Cantrips are now at-will, and every school has an extra school power ranging from energy bolts to illusory debuffs to self-teleportation. This means that low-level wizards no longer run out of spells, and never have to resort to the proverbial crossbow. Also, a number of "win the encounter" spells have been toned down, particularly at lower level.

And some new classes, such as the

• Alchemist - It's a new class that focuses on throwing alchemical bombs at people (touch attacks with a splash effect), brewing lots of potions for free (but of course they go stale after 24 hours), and mutating themselves as a Jekyll/Hyde effect.
• Magus - The new gish class. Yes, you can play a viable bladedancer or magic warrior straight from level one, without requiring complicated builds or multiclass/prestige class combos. It can full attack and cast a spell every round, cast touch spells through his weapon, and quickly enchant any weapon he's holding. He blows the duskblade and hexblade completely out of the water, and gives most eldritch knight builds a run for their money until level 15 or so.
• Oracle - Spontaneous divine caster, basically a cleric/sorcerer.
• Witch - It's basically a warlock/wizard hybrid: it has at-will magical abilities called hexes, and spellcasting from a limited number of schools.