My RPG group recently discovered the "Unchained" classes, and wonder if we should adopt them, or not.
On one hand, there is an existing balance between classes that could be changed with the modifications brought by Unchained (i.e. related question: "Why would a player choose to play a Fighter if a Monk or a Rogue can do almost anything the Fighter does, plus other powers?").
On the other hand, it seems those modifications were done because those classes were considered underpowered/less fun to play, so some players feel they are missing something.
We (the group) are currently clueless, and divided on the subject. We just started our first campaign using Pathfinder less than one year ago, liked it, and are in the process of converting our other D&D 3.5 campaign into Pathfinder. In development terms, if the "Unchained" is a valid patch correction, then we will most probably apply it.
We are looking for experiences in play of the Pathfinder community of players/game masters/experts that could help us decide whether to replace the original classes with their unchained versions in our game or not, and the reasons why.
Now that people have had 3 years to get play experience, how do each of the 4 unchained classes compare to their "chained" equivalents?