You clearly haven’t tried 3.5e, IMHO best edition. Class for every occasion. 362 to be exact, however I might be missing some (ex. savage species monster class progression). And you can obviously mix and match classes as long as you meet the requirements.

  • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
    91·
    11 months ago

    I don’t really count “instead of x you get y & instead of A you get B” as a new class.

    That’s fair, neither does Pathfinder 1.0, those are archetypes.

    There is truly more variance.

    I simply reject this statement wholesale.

    This was more meant for people comparing 5e & PF2e

    It makes sense in this context.

    • Aski@ttrpg.networkOP
      2·
      11 months ago

      Can you point me to a list of pf1e classes, since you claim it has more classes… at least d20pfsrd.com or nethys doesn’t list them all(?). I just assumed you were counting archetypes.

      I found 44 base classes & 119 prestige classes in Pathfinder.

      3.5 has 84 base classes & rest of 362 are prestige (also, tbh, epic classes can be argued that they don’t count, which is fair).

      • stoneparchment@possumpat.io
        21·
        11 months ago

        I think they’re making the claim that if we’re looking at “varience”, variety, etc. then pf1e has more overall variability. Pathfinder does it with a combination of classes and archetypes, where 3.5e does it with just classes. I don’t think they made the explicit claim of there being more classes in pf1e by overall number.

        I find that instead of pathfinder having more “classes” by number, it feels more honest about what is a class and what is a subclass/archetype. Imo, many 3.5e classes would be archetypes in pathfinder, as they fit your definition of “instead of x, you get y” without much substantial difference. And likewise, in my experience playing different archetypes in pf can produce vastly different player experiences (some archetypes and classes more than others, for sure).

        All of this is pretty subjective, though… and I personally haven’t heard anyone making fun of 3.5e for lacking classes, compared to either pf1e or 2e, but it could happen!

        • Aski@ttrpg.networkOP
          2·
          11 months ago

          PF1.0 does in fact have more classes, archetypes, and prestige classes than base 3.5e.

          3rd sentence, first message.

          many 3.5e classes would be archetypes in pathfinder

          True, there are few, I wouldn’t say “many” tho.

          in my experience playing different archetypes in pf can produce vastly different player experiences

          Absolutely they do and I mean, I do like PF1 as well.

          I only have a problem with “PF1 has more classes than 3.5”, which I would classify as “debatable”. I wouldn’t say wrong, since some archetypes do change the class enough, to be in my view as well, another class.