Just had to post this, because the term "help me convert to Pathfinder" has seemingly come to mean "help me add a zillion class features without any regard for balance whatsoever." The core classes were improved in Pathfinder to keep them on a par with some of the splatbook prestige classes. If you bump up those same PrCs, then the core classes need to be bumped up yet again, and we can end up in an infinite power-inflation loop that never ends!
There are quite a few prestige classes that not only don't need this type of "conversion," but that were so good to begin with they were no-brainers. This list includes, but is not limited to:
For the love of Gygax people, not every class needs to be "buffed up"! Hint: if you ask for help "converting" PrCs like the above, and someone says "no conversion needed," maybe they actually mean it. Of COURSE it's your favorite PrC, because it's a no-brainer already! Buffing it some more is nothing but an exercise in self-glorification.
And one last very important note:
+1 level of spellcasting is NOT a "dead" level!!! It probably doesn't need anything added to it, especially if it's a level at which you gain access to another spell level.
Can we please not troll? Especially the conversion forum.
Also, yes, +1 level of spellcasting and nothing else IS a dead level. Jason even defined it as such during the beta when he was talking about clerics and wizards.
It's still a dead level, it's just that they didn't do anything to remove the dead level. Just like the Cleric base class, which has quite a few dead levels. I just said it was defined as a dead level, not that they removed all dead levels ;)
I agree that some people seem to be using "the Pathfinder version of [X]" to mean "the more powerful version of [X]" (whether it needs it or not).
But I also agree that this is mostly trolling.
This wasn't intended as trolling, just as a "stop and think" note. Feel free to take it for whatever it's worth. There are indeed splatbook classes that are sub-par, and need a boost (the swashbuckler and samurai from Complete Warrior are good examples). But let's not forget that Pathfinder nerfed the druid, rather than augmenting it! There are any number of classes that don't need a power-up, is all I'm saying -- particularly the ones that exist to increase the power of full casters.
From another thread:
I would be cautious about adding very much to the warmage to start with. We're not out to escalate the arms race with Pathfinder. The base classes have been enhanced to make them attractive relative to some of the newer options. Warmage is hardly new, so it may be relatively weak and deserve a little bump, but let's not forget ourselves and just add things for bumping's sake.
Consider this thread a call-out to that quote (which received no such accusations).
|
This wasn't intended as trolling, just as a "stop and think" note. Feel free to take it for whatever it's worth. There are indeed splatbook classes that are sub-par, and need a boost (the swashbuckler and samurai from Complete Warrior are good examples). But let's not forget that Pathfinder nerfed the druid, rather than augmenting it! There are any number of classes that don't need a power-up, is all I'm saying -- particularly the ones that exist to increase the power of full casters.
From another thread:
I would be cautious about adding very much to the warmage to start with. We're not out to escalate the arms race with Pathfinder. The base classes have been enhanced to make them attractive relative to some of the newer options. Warmage is hardly new, so it may be relatively weak and deserve a little bump, but let's not forget ourselves and just add things for bumping's sake.Consider this thread a call-out to that quote (which received no such accusations).
Kirth, we may not always see eye to eye, we may argue things back and forth on this board.
But seriously man...
<3
|
How about we go thru all the 3.5 wotc splatbooks and make some kind of a base class/prc "fixing" ranking ?
It's NOT meant to be a "power" ranking as in wizard > fighter, but rather a look at how does a given class do the intended job and does it need any changes ?
Example:
Class fine as it is: Duskblade
Class requires updates to PF mechanics: Psion (concentration, psicraft)
Class requires buffs: Swashbuckler
Class requires nerfs: Abjurant Cheescake
Class requires a complete rewrite: Truenamer
Just an idea. Between our collective minds, we could do a "Converter's Guide to Classes" as a guideline for all aspiring converters.
|
How about we go thru all the 3.5 wotc splatbooks and make some kind of a base class/prc "fixing" ranking ?
It's NOT meant to be a "power" ranking as in wizard > fighter, but rather a look at how does a given class do the intended job and does it need any changes ?
Example:
Class fine as it is: Duskblade
Class requires updates to PF mechanics: Psion (concentration, psicraft)
Class requires buffs: Swashbuckler
Class requires nerfs: Abjurant Cheescake
Class requires a complete rewrite: Truenamer
Just an idea. Between our collective minds, we could do a "Converter's Guide to Classes" as a guideline for all aspiring converters.
I agree wholeheartedly with this proposal..
Just had to post this, because the term "help me convert to Pathfinder" has seemingly come to mean "help me add a zillion class features without any regard for balance whatsoever." The core classes were improved in Pathfinder to keep them on a par with some of the splatbook prestige classes. If you bump up those same PrCs, then the core classes need to be bumped up yet again, and we can end up in an infinite power-inflation loop that never ends!
There are quite a few prestige classes that not only don't need this type of "conversion," but that were so good to begin with they were no-brainers. This list includes, but is not limited to:
Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil, for arcane casters;
Radiant Servant of Pelor, for clerics;
Frenzied Berserker, for barbarians;
Abjurant Champion, for warrior/mage hybrids. For the love of Gygax people, not every class needs to be "buffed up"! Hint: if you ask for help "converting" PrCs like the above, and someone says "no conversion needed," maybe they actually mean it. Of COURSE it's your favorite PrC, because it's a no-brainer already! Buffing it some more is nothing but an exercise in self-glorification.
And one last very important note:
+1 level of spellcasting is NOT a "dead" level!!! It probably doesn't need anything added to it, especially if it's a level at which you gain access to another spell level.
I'm kind of agreeing with you here.
The majority of PrC are overpowered compared to the old Core classes but with the new Pathfinder upgrades brought them (the core classes) in line. Leave the splatbook PrC alone. Let us not start an arms race.
Actually the VAST majority of PrCs are underpowered compared to 3.5 classes, let alone PF ones (taking them as whole classes, not just as 1 or 2 level dips).
The majority of PrCs people use in optimization builds are overpowered.
You'll note that optimization builds use, on average, 1-2 PrCs from each book, while each book averages something like 6-12 PrCs.
Seriously, when was the last time you saw a Hunter Of The Dead? How about a Master Of The Unseen Hand? Stonelord? Malconvoker? Cloaked Dancer? Holy Scourge?
I could go on and on and on. There are literally hundreds of prestige classes, and yet you only see maybe a couple dozen used in builds with any regularity, even among non-optimizers. Why is that? Because most of the rest are worse than just staying as a base class, let alone taking a better PrC.
Actually the VAST majority of PrCs are underpowered compared to 3.5 classes, let alone PF ones (taking them as whole classes, not just as 1 or 2 level dips).
The majority of PrCs people use in optimization builds are overpowered.
You'll note that optimization builds use, on average, 1-2 PrCs from each book, while each book averages something like 6-12 PrCs.
Seriously, when was the last time you saw a Hunter Of The Dead? How about a Master Of The Unseen Hand? Stonelord? Malconvoker? Cloaked Dancer? Holy Scourge?
I could go on and on and on. There are literally hundreds of prestige classes, and yet you only see maybe a couple dozen used in builds with any regularity, even among non-optimizers. Why is that? Because most of the rest are worse than just staying as a base class, let alone taking a better PrC.
I counted 150 PrC last time I looked. A lot of them are builds which you can make by using core classes and selecting the right Feats and Skills some are just pure cr@p. I personally don't like PrC as you point out people take 1 or 2 levels and swop out again.
You yourself point out that "The majority of PrCs people use in optimization builds are overpowered" and answer the question. PrC don't need a rebuild.If you want to do it for 150 classes, be my guest!
Crystal Keep has ~360 prestige classes cataloged, and it doesn't include anything past early '07 so it's missing quite a few 3.5 books. It also doesn't include ANY Dragon magazine PrCs except the ones that are in Dragon Compendium.
I pointed out that roughly two dozen prestige classes don't need rebuilt. You said ZERO prestige classes need rebuilt and that the majority (that's 200+) are overpowered. There's a world of difference between the two when there are over 400 prestige classes. Two dozen is roughly 5% of 400.
Crystal Keep has ~360 prestige classes cataloged, and it doesn't include anything past early '07 so it's missing quite a few 3.5 books. It also doesn't include ANY Dragon magazine PrCs except the ones that are in Dragon Compendium.
I pointed out that roughly two dozen prestige classes don't need rebuilt. You said ZERO prestige classes need rebuilt and that the majority (that's 200+) are overpowered. There's a world of difference between the two when there are over 400 prestige classes. Two dozen is roughly 5% of 400.
The problem is the word PRESTIGE which implies better or best.
I think the core classes should be labeled prestige as these should be better or best.I see the majority as to be niche classes and something I may use for an NPC. They don't IMO need redressing as I guess that the majority have limited playtesting and any fatal flaws may not have been found.
I'm not here for an argument you play your game your way and I'll play mine my way. I think having nearly 400 class available clumsy and wrong, it was this kind of class bloat which drives me away from 3.5 rather than towards it. Thats why I use Pathfinder and ONLY the PrC which come with it and hope that it doesn't go down the 400 class route.
At least you admit you were wrong.
At least you admit you were wrong.
Where did I say that?
|
I don't believe in prestige classes myself. I rendered the Weightless Foot class from Dragon down to a feat tree without any difficulty. Give it to a monk or rogue and there you go. I know Kirth did the same with quite a few. So rather than trying to remake them all, focus on the really good ideas and cannibalize the bad ones.
At least you admit you were wrong.Where did I say that?
First you said that the majority of PrCs are overpowered. Then in your last post, you said the majority are niche classes and only useful for NPCs.
So, either you're admitting you were wrong -- which there's nothing wrong with -- or you're saying two things that mean exactly opposite what the other does. I chose to believe the former. Was I wrong?
At least you admit you were wrong.Where did I say that?First you said that the majority of PrCs are overpowered. Then in your last post, you said the majority are niche classes and only useful for NPCs.
So, either you're admitting you were wrong -- which there's nothing wrong with -- or you're saying two things that mean exactly opposite what the other does. I chose to believe the former. Was I wrong?
I see the majority as to be niche classes and SOMETHING I may use for an NPC.
I also see the majority of PrC being overpowered OR not playtested enough. That was with just the 150 that I am aware of. You pointed out that there are nearer 400.I never said that they were only useful for NPCs.
Thats the end of it for me.
|
|
Class fine as it is: Duskblade
The Duskblade, like the Warlock, doesn't suffer from a lack of power, so much as a lack of *options.* There's little to no diversity, and each of those classes, while decently balanced for later 3.5 or Pathfinder play, are deadly dull after just a few sessions of play.
If there was some way to offer options for classes like this, without significantly altering their current power level, I'd be happier with them.
|
At least you admit you were wrong.Where did I say that?First you said that the majority of PrCs are overpowered. Then in your last post, you said the majority are niche classes and only useful for NPCs.
So, either you're admitting you were wrong -- which there's nothing wrong with -- or you're saying two things that mean exactly opposite what the other does. I chose to believe the former. Was I wrong?
You equate saying that something is niche or useful for NPCs are being underpowered, which is a false logical leap and not what the poster meant. PrCs on NPCs can be useful a) to provide flavour and/or b) may be overpowered or inappropriate for an PC and not a problem for an NPC you are expecting your PCs to kill in a single encounter.
In any case, why the hostile tone? People have their views and can share them without trying to be "right" or "wrong" - frankly it probably boils down to the individual standard classes and PrCs.
At least you admit you were wrong.Where did I say that?First you said that the majority of PrCs are overpowered. Then in your last post, you said the majority are niche classes and only useful for NPCs.
So, either you're admitting you were wrong -- which there's nothing wrong with -- or you're saying two things that mean exactly opposite what the other does. I chose to believe the former. Was I wrong?
You equate saying that something is niche or useful for NPCs are being underpowered, which is a false logical leap and not what the poster meant. PrCs on NPCs can be useful a) to provide flavour and/or b) may be overpowered or inappropriate for an PC and not a problem for an NPC you are expecting your PCs to kill in a single encounter.
In any case, why the hostile tone? People have their views and can share them without trying to be "right" or "wrong" - frankly it probably boils down to the individual standard classes and PrCs.
Thankyou!
And eloquently put by the way. 'Tis exactly what I meant.IMO a lot of PrC are good for NPCs for flavor etc but unbalanced for PCs
Wow, I've never heard the Warlock described as having a lack of options. Warlocks have tons of options as long as you don't pick purely eldritch blast-focused invocations. They're also supreme with magic items; no other class is as able to pick up and use any magic item except Artificers.
You want a class that doesn't have options, look at the Marshal or the Dragon Shaman (DS isn't quite as bad).
This wasn't intended as trolling, just as a "stop and think" note.
O.K., maybe it was just the title of the thread that sounded a little confrontational.
I agree with your thesis, though; "Pathfinder" is not street slang for "more powerful". :-)
You equate saying that something is niche or useful for NPCs are being underpowered, which is a false logical leap and not what the poster meant.
If a PrC is a niche class, then by definition it's not overpowered. Overpowered classes are classes that are so good that they become "mandatory" in a char-op sense. You don't see any niche PrCs in char-op builds unless they're a "let's see how many times we can get constitution added to our AC" (or whatever other silly char-op excersize) build.
In any case, why the hostile tone? People have their views and can share them without trying to be "right" or "wrong" - frankly it probably boils down to the individual standard classes and PrCs.
I wasn't hostile at all. Actually, I gave the guy a freaking compliment. It's rare that you'll find people on the internet willing to admit to errors or misjudgements.
My thought has been that base classes typically need improved because base 20 is supposed to be a viable option compared to base 5/prc 10/prc 5. Improving prestige classes is counterproductive, and most of what I've done with Prestige Classes at all has been to fold them back into thematically similar base classes. Swashbuckler/Duelist and Shugenja/Void Disciple are no-brainers, even if the latter wasn't a good choice mechanically.
Most of the classes I've converted have ended up with improvements largely because they were lame-- and recognized as lame-- to start with, especially compared with other late cycle classes and with classes that have received Pathfinder upgrades.
"If a PrC is a niche class, then by definition it's not overpowered."
Okay, what do I mean by a niche class?
To me a niche class is one which is specialised for a single purpose. To use a real world analogy a heart surgeon is a niche class, has +10 to his transplant heart skill etc. It doesn't make him underpowered. It makes him specialised. Give him a bit of dentistry to do and he is as good at it as you or me.
A PrC IN MY OPINION is a niche class in that it does something specialised really well. The problem is nearly all of them give out massivly useful things at the first level and this encourages players to chop and change just to get that neat little ability. In my experiance of the game and from reading comments on various boards a lot of PrC make really good NPCs for flavor or those overpowerful initial level abilities but make for lousy PCs. If anything needs to be redressed with PrC then it is either forcing the players to stick with them for more levels (something I disagree with) or spread the neat abilities out more.
|
|
You equate saying that something is niche or useful for NPCs are being underpowered, which is a false logical leap and not what the poster meant.If a PrC is a niche class, then by definition it's not overpowered. Overpowered classes are classes that are so good that they become "mandatory" in a char-op sense. You don't see any niche PrCs in char-op builds unless they're a "let's see how many times we can get constitution added to our AC" (or whatever other silly char-op excersize) build.
Maybe - I would suggest that niche means it excels at certain things, and that depends upon the encounters or the campaign, even. It then depends on how much that niche comes up. I take your point, actually, about the same old suspects appearing in optimised builds and a lot of PrCs not doing so, which suggests their relative utility. My point was more that your were equating niche with weak - they are not the same, it depends on the circumstances. And some PrCs (especially the "evil" ones which crop up in things like Libris Mortis) seem much more appropriate to NPC villains than PCs by their very nature, irrespective of balance issues.
In any case, why the hostile tone? People have their views and can share them without trying to be "right" or "wrong" - frankly it probably boils down to the individual standard classes and PrCs.
I wasn't hostile at all. Actually, I gave the guy a freaking compliment. It's rare that you'll find people on the internet willing to admit to errors or misjudgements.
If you say so - I notice you aren't exactly rushing to the mea culpa either. If a guy is wrong, it's normally more polite to gloss over it than pin him down and make him excoriate himself in public and say, "Are you saying you are wrong? Are you? ARE YOU!!! Well played, my man, not many people admit that."
If you say so - I notice you aren't exactly rushing to the mea culpa either.
Not in this thread, no. On the other hand, I have apologized directly to Spacelard in another thread for another misunderstanding and corrected a few other mistakes I've made in other threads. All this morning.
Again, there's no shame in making mistakes. The pride b~*!*!## that most people take on themselves is one of the biggest barriers to effective communication in the entire world, even more than the language barrier IMO. I admit mistakes every single day because I make mistakes every single day. To err is human, and there's no shame in being human. There's far more shame in pretending to be perfect when everyone knows no one is.
And, frankly, I'm getting more than a little irritated at you. You've twice now accused me of being hostile and/or rude in hostile and/or rude manners. Pot, meet kettle.
|
|
There is no shame in making mistakes - it's how we learn. However, there is also more to life than right or wrong, but also points of view over value judgements, which is how this whole thing kicked off. And there is also giving the wrong impression of what you are trying to say, which is what has probably happened. It happens, and it's no big deal when you are simply crossing wires. It is a truism that you need to be careful what you write in the absence of non-verbal cues. You aren't being hostile - fine. However, what you wrote was misconstrued, and that is at least partly the responsibility of the writer. As it happens, I'm not feeling hostile either, but you are now getting upset with me. Probably a bit of time-out from this subject (i.e. whether we are being sufficiently polite to one another, not Kirth's opening point) would do us good, since I think we have probably exhausted the subject.
|
|
Hello folks, can we get back on track ?
I'm looking for a few brave souls who would help me out to catalogize the 3.5 official base classes/prcs in following groups:
- Fine as it is
- Overpowered, requires tuning down
- Underpowered, requires tuning up
- Beyond repair (requires reworking of core idea/mechanic)
"Fine as it is" means "can be ran under PF rules without major changes and provide gaming intended gaming experience in relation to PFRPG core classes/prc's"
- Fine as it is
- Overpowered, requires tuning down
- Underpowered, requires tuning up
- Beyond repair (requires reworking of core idea/mechanic)
Does your last category include "better off as a feat or an alternate class feature of a base class"? Because that's a huge category...
Zurai, it's not a 'dead level' for prestige classes, the Eldrich Knight is proof enough of that.
The Eldrich Knight proved that +1 caster level with full BAB and d10s for hit points are not a dead level.
|
|
Does your last category include "better off as a feat or an alternate class feature of a base class"? Because that's a huge category...- Fine as it is
- Overpowered, requires tuning down
- Underpowered, requires tuning up
- Beyond repair (requires reworking of core idea/mechanic)
Pretty much it goes like this
1: You can take it as it is, play and have a good time
2: You need to tone it down so it isn't a "no-brainer" choice
3: You need to bump it up slightly to compete with PF standard.
4: Urm, why is it a class anyway ?
Does your last category include "better off as a feat or an alternate class feature of a base class"? Because that's a huge category...- Fine as it is
- Overpowered, requires tuning down
- Underpowered, requires tuning up
- Beyond repair (requires reworking of core idea/mechanic)
These are exactly the sorts of ideas I'd hoped to spur here. I agree that some classes do need some added features. Some, however, need to be nerfed and/or sandbagged completely (e.g., Abjurant Cheesewhore). And, personally, I agree with Hogarth that the majority should simply be superceded and/or rolled into the core classes: build a Thief-Acrobat using rogue talents. Make the "bear warrior" PrC into a chain of rage powers, as Jal Dorak did on another thread. Etc.
I would LOVE to play an Abjurant Cheesewhore!
On a slightly more serious note if there are nearly 400 PrC shouldn't we decide which of the 400 to concentrate on first?
Class fine as it is: Duskblade
I'm currently playing a Duskblade in a low-level (started at L1, just made L3) campaign. The only real questions the DM and I worked out together were
1) Change HD to D10 to match BAB progression as in other Pathfinder base classes ?
We elected not to, and left the Duskblade as a d8 HD.
2) Make 0 level spells (cantrips) unlimited as per Pathfinder sorceror/wizard ?
We elected to allow unlimited cantrips (the Duskblade only gets a few), but not unlimited Arcane Attunement.
3) Spell list: So far, I'm voluntarily using only those spells that appear in the Pathfinder book. We'll have to revisit this decision when my Duskblade reaches level 5, as I'd like to take Dimension Hop from the Spell Compendium and there is currently no Pathfinder equivalent.
So far, this Duskblade seems fine relative to the rest of the party who are all Pathfinder base classes ( L2 Cleric of Olidamara, L2 Wizard, 2x L2 fighters (one is a DMPC), L2 half-orc monk, dwarven Multi-class L1 rogue/L1 Barbarian). I do feel a little down on hit points, but that's mostly because the fighters rolled well and I rolled poorly. We'll see if this holds true over the next several levels as the differences between 3.5 and Pathfinder accumulate.
I would LOVE to play an Abjurant Cheesewhore!
When we allowed it in 3.5, not only did every "gish" character take it, but also every single-classed wizard and sorcerer spent a feat on a martial weapon just so they could take it, too: full spellcasting, full BAB, d10 HD, and automatic quickened, extended spells -- and a host of other benefits -- make this an arcanist's "must-have" PrC.
Radiant Servant of Pelor was the same way for clerics: 100% of the benefits of a regular cleric, with added bonuses on top.
When we allowed it in 3.5, not only did every "gish" character take it, but also every single-classed wizard and sorcerer spent a feat on a martial weapon just so they could take it, too: full spellcasting, full BAB, d10 HD, and automatic quickened, extended spells -- and a host of other benefits -- make this an arcanist's "must-have" PrC.
IMO biggest issue with the class is right there and that's where the 'fix' should be targeted, with the prerequisites. Popped up another thread with my idea feel free to beat it up. I am interested in honest thoughts so feel free to say "Totally borken move along"
Features spread, not all the cool abilities crammed in at first level to encourage players to stick with it and not dip in and out.
A neat capstone ability to encourage play to the end.
Dump any PrC which you could build using core class abilities and the right feats.
They mustn't outshine the core classes.
Qualifing for them should actually mean something and be part of the character development and not just a skill/feat/class feature qualification. By this I mean something like the Assassin who has to kill someone just to join the guild.
Dipping out should/might have some sort of roleplaying downside.
Abjurant Cheesewhore, I want a full write up!
Is it all cheese or do you have Abjurant BlueCheesewhore, Abjurant CottageCheesewhore, etc. Have they got special weaknesses with pickles?
What about the PrC Fondue Master.
Sorry I've had a strange day...
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I would LOVE to play an Abjurant Cheesewhore!
On a slightly more serious note if there are nearly 400 PrC shouldn't we decide which of the 400 to concentrate on first?
I'm glad to see my nickname for it caught on :-)
Though with that avatar, maybe Aberrant Cheesewhore might fit better :P
I would LOVE to play an Abjurant Cheesewhore!
On a slightly more serious note if there are nearly 400 PrC shouldn't we decide which of the 400 to concentrate on first?
I'm glad to see my nickname for it caught on :-)
Though with that avatar, maybe Aberrant Cheesewhore might fit better :P
"Ha! Quake in fear at the sight of my slightly runny Brie Elemental!"
The last words of Count von Chedder the Cheesewhore.
IMO biggest issue with the class is right there and that's where the 'fix' should be targeted, with the prerequisites. Popped up another thread with my idea feel free to beat it up. I am interested in honest thoughts so feel free to say "Totally borken move along"
/agree
In my game we changed the requirement to proficiency with all martial weapons.