allgeektout

This is coming about a month and a half later than it should, so sorry about the delay in getting this out.

The first RPG book I owned was the 3.5 PHB – it’s up there in the allgeektout banner pic if you look. It was a few years ago, and I had no idea what was going on. I tried flipping through it more than a few times, but I never really figured out how tabletop RPGs worked, besides something about rolling dice.

Now, however, I am much (well, kind of) wiser, and Paizo sent along a copy of Pathfinder, so I figure it’s time to give the 3.x ruleset another whirl. Here are some random thoughts about it that might possibly considered a review to some people.

FIGHTERS ARE DULL, DOMAINS ARE AWESOME

Something I always suspected about 3.x was the whole fighter situation. I already knew that 3.x feats and 4e feats were two completely different animals, but still, a class that grants me additional proficiencies and feats throughout all my levels? I’m a conceptualizer, not an optimizer, so spending a lot of time picking that stuff out isn’t a lot of fun for me. Plus, I really enjoy getting all new abilities as I level up.

Speaking of conceptualizing, how come I didn’t know about domains before now? I always thought of clerics as a fairly boring class, but domains definitely add some more flavor to them. In fact, the first character I made with Pathfinder was a cleric, and as a side project I’m making some gods specifically so I can combine different domains – not because they necessarily synergize well, but because they sound so cool together.

COMBAT MANEUVERS ARE SLICK

I don’t know anything about the terror that was the grapple rules in 3.x, but of course I have heard of them. I like the CMB rules because it makes a move towards a more unified game mechanic – any action you want to do in combat is 1d20 + a modifier (a very inaccurate generalization, I know). Anything to streamline the rules just a little and make it go a bit faster is a good idea in my book.

Combat Maneuver Defense, though? Eh, I’m not too thrilled with it. It just adds another defense to the list, in a sense moving backwards from what they did with CMB. I understand why they did it, but I’m just not a huge fan – I would have rather had the maneuvers be defended against with one of the three standard saves.

SPELLS, SPELLS, SPELLS

One of the only things I really read in-depth in the 3.5 PHB was the spells section, because, boy were they fun to read. Although I didn’t really understand any of the game terms, I planned out vastly complex scenarios where each spell could be useful.

Pathfinder hasn’t changed that for me. Spells are still incredibly entertaining for me to read through, except now I understand what most of the words mean. So I really enjoy that. What can I say? I’m a magic dork.

RANDOM THOUGHTS

Confirmation rolls for critical hits? Ugh. I could not imagine something more killjoy than the adrenaline rush of rolling a nat 20, only to then fail the confirmation roll.

I really like the way the races are laid out. In the 3.5 book, it’s all just kind of a mish-mash of fluff alongside features. In Pathfinder, it’s clearly separated – the top of the page is the fluff, and the bottom is all the racial features. It’s very nice.

The art in this book is amazing. In addition to spells, looking at the art was one of my favorite parts of the 3.5 rulebook, and this kicks it up to 11, and then turns it up a bit more. I love these drawings.

Anyway, needless to say, the Pathfinder rulebook has made a much better impression on me than the 3.5 rulebook. Probably because at this point I mostly understand how RPGs work, but also because it is a beautiful, well-produced book. And the rules are nice too, I guess .