As far as I know, Pathfinder 1E was a continuation of D&D 3.5 after they moved on to D&D 4E. I think Pathfinder 1E is compatible with D&D 3.5, but don’t quote me on that. Pathfinder 2E is a much more tightly balanced system, and is probably best for its 4 degrees of success, where 10 over a DC is a critical success and 10 under is a critical failure.
Also, Pathfinder has way more options to customize your character as you level up compared to D&D 5E.
Pathfinder 1e was compatible with 3.5e in practice; my group based everything out of Pathfinder books and sprinkled 3.5e in occasionally.
2e’s four degrees of success/failure and the three action system codify the sorts of things 5e players always seem to want to squeeze into the D&D rules. The three action economy takes a few minutes to learn and then removes a lot of back and forth negotiation. Say a player wants to untangle a rope, swing on it past the chandelier, and kick a target in the head in one turn.
When I played 5e it often seemed to go like this: “Is freeing the rope from its anchor my action? I wanted to attack at the end. Is swinging my action, like a dash? Do I need to use my movement, or is the rope doing the moving, I feel like the rope would make me faster and I want to move after I land. I have multiple attacks, so after I drop the first one I’m going to move to the next enemy and attack. Wait, can I use my bonus action now?”
It’s not even necessarily that a DM is a killjoy, most of the time they let players do little extra stuff, it’s just that it kind of has to be discussed.
In Pathfinder, easy. That’s three actions. Grab, swing, attack. Next player’s turn.
As far as I know, Pathfinder 1E was a continuation of D&D 3.5 after they moved on to D&D 4E. I think Pathfinder 1E is compatible with D&D 3.5, but don’t quote me on that. Pathfinder 2E is a much more tightly balanced system, and is probably best for its 4 degrees of success, where 10 over a DC is a critical success and 10 under is a critical failure.
Also, Pathfinder has way more options to customize your character as you level up compared to D&D 5E.
Pathfinder 1e was compatible with 3.5e in practice; my group based everything out of Pathfinder books and sprinkled 3.5e in occasionally.
2e’s four degrees of success/failure and the three action system codify the sorts of things 5e players always seem to want to squeeze into the D&D rules. The three action economy takes a few minutes to learn and then removes a lot of back and forth negotiation. Say a player wants to untangle a rope, swing on it past the chandelier, and kick a target in the head in one turn.
When I played 5e it often seemed to go like this: “Is freeing the rope from its anchor my action? I wanted to attack at the end. Is swinging my action, like a dash? Do I need to use my movement, or is the rope doing the moving, I feel like the rope would make me faster and I want to move after I land. I have multiple attacks, so after I drop the first one I’m going to move to the next enemy and attack. Wait, can I use my bonus action now?”
It’s not even necessarily that a DM is a killjoy, most of the time they let players do little extra stuff, it’s just that it kind of has to be discussed.
In Pathfinder, easy. That’s three actions. Grab, swing, attack. Next player’s turn.