Pathfinder...

[Aryxbez]

I'm sure like the arguments for/against 4th edition, is also another Topic that has been spoken a hundred times over. All the same I thought to ask it here, and I apologize for bringing up what is probably a "tired" topic. However, I've been wondering, is Pathfinder really all that grand? I've heard it still has the same problems as 3.5, just with some "houserules" of sorts.

I've looked at Pathfinder a bit, but not sure if I could figure out if it's more balanced or what. If it still indeed has the same problems as 3.5, with the whole spellcasters reigning supreme over the martial types and what not. As I know there are those who make it sound like the "3.5 messiah" and one of my friends thinks of it highly. I'm even hearing, that Paladin and Fighter are known for being two of the best classes??

Anyways, what's so great about Pathfinder, what are it's problems, is it truly a good RPG or what?

If need be, ye guys can send links that explain these bits. I just have my doubts that Pathfinder "fixes" the problems of 3.5.

[Althar]

Well, the Pathfinder fighter is probably marginally better than a straight 3.5 fighter, class-features wise, but not enough to make it the strongest class if the spellcasters know what they're doing. A lot of people also complain that some of the changes to feats are basically stealth fighter nerfs that undo whatever improvements they made to the class features.