Archetypes we would still like to see after UC


Product Discussion

101 to 150 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

dungeonmaster heathy wrote:

Just got UC; haven't read through it; first thing I noticed is gunslinger doesn't have stealth, which would make being a sniper kinda difficult,.....so.....maybe a "sniper" archetype?

Actually, sniper's kinduva "prestige class" in real life.....

La Longue Carabine!


Shisumo wrote:

Finesse fighter.

Because seriously.

Agreed - there was nothing in UC for the fencer-concept fighter, although they did give a nod to the more skilled fighter that's all it was. I want to see a viable swashbuckler-type that doesn't depend on sneak attack. I want to see a thrust with a rapier be as lethal as a hack with a two-handed sword (because being run through the heart does not make you less dead than having your head cut off, after all).

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Dabbler wrote:
Shisumo wrote:

Finesse fighter.

Because seriously.

Agreed - there was nothing in UC for the fencer-concept fighter, although they did give a nod to the more skilled fighter that's all it was. I want to see a viable swashbuckler-type that doesn't depend on sneak attack. I want to see a thrust with a rapier be as lethal as a hack with a two-handed sword (because being run through the heart does not make you less dead than having your head cut off, after all).

Indeed, it woulda been nice to see a series of feats in UC building off of Combat Expertise for fencers and such.


LazarX wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Jason Ellis 350 wrote:


And I'll mention another one again. The sorcerer archetype that gets cool and useful stuff that no wizard can ever have. Not through feats, not through magic items, not through any method other than the GM allowing the player to break the rules.
None Arcane bloodline sorcererers already have that. Wizards and others might dip into eldritch bloodline after making some major attribute, feat, and skill investment, but they never get the full fruits of it. They have full and flexible use of metamagic, something that wizards can only dream of.
What flexible use of metamagic are you talking about here? Yes sure sorcerers can use metamagic feats better than the wizard but wizards can use metamagic rods much better than the sorcerers.
Yes if you can have Rods To Order from MagicMart. I'm talking about using class abilities alone where magic, isn't dripping from tree branches.

Please let's not go into that road again, the rules allow me to buy magic items and since they do allow me to, i will buy them period. In addition buy taking one feat (craft rod) i can have nearly any metamagic i want.


leo1925 wrote:
In addition buy taking one feat (craft rod) i can have nearly any metamagic i want.

Not quite. You still need to have the feat you are putting into the rod in addition to the craft rod feat.


Jason Ellis 350 wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
In addition buy taking one feat (craft rod) i can have nearly any metamagic i want.

Not quite. You still need to have the feat you are putting into the rod in addition to the craft rod feat.

Just take the +5 to the crafting DC for not having one of the prerequisites and you are golden.


Lord Fyre wrote:

What I mean is there are no Asian archetypes for Barbarians, Clerics, Druids, Fighters, Paladins, Rangers, Sorcerers, or Wizards (Alchemists, Inquisitors, Oracles, Summoners, Witches).

Now, I am not saying that ALL of these classes need Asian archetypes, but more of them should. Asian Magical traditions have barely been touched on.

You're also not going to FIND many archetypes for some of those classes. Like others have pointed out, the Elemental Wizard Schools are heavily inspired off of the traditional elements of Oriental society (Fire, Water, Earth, Wood, Metal) and a Cleric, in all honesty, is defined by their god more then anything; use an Orient-inspired God and you have an Orient-inspired Cleric.

The concept of Alchemy was a very Western Tradition; many of the myths involving it (such as the Philosopher's Stone) come directly from the United Kingdom, so I doubt you'd ever see much in the way of an Oriental Alchemist. Along the same lines are Inquisitors, which are based off of the religious phenomena that happened notoriously in Spain and all across Europe in the 1500s (history check?). Along this line are Paladins; while you are going to find stories of faithful, god-blessed warriors across the world, the concept of a Paladin comes heavily from Europe; most notably the Knights of the Round Table.

Some classes don't translate well into EITHER society's cultures because their powers are somewhat vague or ambiguous to virtually all cultures. Examples for this include the Druid, who could be given an Oriental twist simply by giving them an Animal Companion that relates to the Oriental World in some way (Tigers for China / India would be a good one). Summoners can simply choose to shape / fluff their Eidoloen in a way so it resembles an Oriental Monster (Oni and Kappa both come to mind, among others).

Among your entire list, I think that only the classes that could reasonably get Asian archetypes are the Barbarian, the Fighter, the Ranger, and the Witch, though to be equally fair, I have no idea what one could do for the witch. Anyway, the point is that not all of the classes have or require Asian equivalents in order to work in an Oriental Campaign setting.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

Golden-Esque wrote:
The concept of Alchemy was a very Western Tradition; many of the myths involving it (such as the Philosopher's Stone) come directly from the United Kingdom, so I doubt you'd ever see much in the way of an Oriental Alchemist.

Link: Chinese alchemy on Wikipedia.

Link: Chinese alchemy in Paizo's PRD (scroll down to the Internal Alchemist archetype).


Epic Meepo wrote:
Golden-Esque wrote:
The concept of Alchemy was a very Western Tradition; many of the myths involving it (such as the Philosopher's Stone) come directly from the United Kingdom, so I doubt you'd ever see much in the way of an Oriental Alchemist.

Link: Chinese alchemy on Wikipedia.

Link: Chinese alchemy in Paizo's PRD (scroll down to the Internal Alchemist archetype).

I find that the Alchemist lends very easily to an Eastern character type. I play a Tian Alchemist that uses the 'ancient arts' of his family to fight evil. Most of the family are traditional Commoners and a few Experts that use Craft (Alchemy), but he's one of the exceptional ones that realizes the true power to be found in alchemy. He's not a martial artist, but he's got strong kung fu!


CG and LE "paladins" please!

And something like the Tome of Horror's Archivist - scholarly divine caster who functions like a wizard, including the use of a spellbook.

And I'd still like a character reminiscent of the Doctor - a true skillmonkey, with no casting or combat abilities but has clever uses for skills others don't think of and always seems to have the materials at hand to solve any problem.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Master shapeshifter. Perhaps as a non-spellcasting subclass of the Druid. Capable of shapeshifting regularly, with some forms lasting long enough for infiltration and other forms more closely tied to combat. Versatile but not as versatile as a pure Druid.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Y'know, I sat down to make an archetype for 'Laughing Knights of Cayden Cailean' at one point....and I realized there really weren't any abilities that I'd change out between a CG holy warrior and the standard Paladin. Just come up with new Code of Conduct, replace any anti-Chaos spells with their anti-Law equivalent, and you're golden.


Jason Ellis 350 wrote:
A sorcerer archetype that features lots of nice things that no wizard can have, ever.

+1

Also, a spontaneous casting magus archetype, for those who don't want to carry a spellbook around in the thick of combat and would actually like to use evocation spells from time to time (i.e. not an arcane duelist bard).

Oh, and a LE paladin alternate class. The champions of Asmodeus need some love.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I'll second the Paladin love going around. I'd love to see (and play) a (CG)Paladin of Freedom or a (NG) Paladin of [forgot what it was called in 3.x]. Throw in a LE and a NE paladin and we got ourselves a party.


This would probably have to be an alternate class to work properly. but I'd like to see an archetype that lets the Magus be a Rogue/Wizard instead of a Fighter/Wizard. It would have to have a very different spell list, that's for sure.


Bluescale wrote:


Also, a spontaneous casting magus archetype, for those who don't want to carry a spellbook around in the thick of combat and would actually like to use evocation spells from time to time (i.e. not an arcane duelist bard).

I, for one, would not like to see this. I don't think that every concept should be available as both prepared and spontaneous. I think that the magus is great as a strictly prepared caster and the bard is best kept exclusively as a spontaneous caster.


Matt Stich wrote:
I'll second the Paladin love going around. I'd love to see (and play) a (CG)Paladin of Freedom or a (NG) Paladin of [forgot what it was called in 3.x]. Throw in a LE and a NE paladin and we got ourselves a party.

How about a true Neutral "paladin" of the Green Faith. Not a priestly druid, but a smiting badass of balance.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
HappyDaze wrote:
Matt Stich wrote:
I'll second the Paladin love going around. I'd love to see (and play) a (CG)Paladin of Freedom or a (NG) Paladin of [forgot what it was called in 3.x]. Throw in a LE and a NE paladin and we got ourselves a party.
How about a true Neutral "paladin" of the Green Faith. Not a priestly druid, but a smiting badass of balance.

Who exactly would the smite target?


Epic Meepo wrote:
Golden-Esque wrote:
The concept of Alchemy was a very Western Tradition; many of the myths involving it (such as the Philosopher's Stone) come directly from the United Kingdom, so I doubt you'd ever see much in the way of an Oriental Alchemist.

Link: Chinese alchemy on Wikipedia.

Link: Chinese alchemy in Paizo's PRD (scroll down to the Internal Alchemist archetype).

+1 Alchemy is very Asian.


Robert Cameron wrote:
Epic Meepo wrote:
Golden-Esque wrote:
The concept of Alchemy was a very Western Tradition; many of the myths involving it (such as the Philosopher's Stone) come directly from the United Kingdom, so I doubt you'd ever see much in the way of an Oriental Alchemist.

Link: Chinese alchemy on Wikipedia.

Link: Chinese alchemy in Paizo's PRD (scroll down to the Internal Alchemist archetype).
+1 Alchemy is very Asian.

The word 'alchemy' is derrived from "Al Khem" the arab name for the land of Egypt. In fact the ancient Egyptians were among the first practitioners of 'alchemy' IRL. The class/concept is adaptable for any kind of cultural setting, be it European, Middle Eastern, Oriental or anything else.


Matt Stich wrote:
HappyDaze wrote:
Matt Stich wrote:
I'll second the Paladin love going around. I'd love to see (and play) a (CG)Paladin of Freedom or a (NG) Paladin of [forgot what it was called in 3.x]. Throw in a LE and a NE paladin and we got ourselves a party.
How about a true Neutral "paladin" of the Green Faith. Not a priestly druid, but a smiting badass of balance.
Who exactly would the smite target?

Smite CE, CG, LE, LG at full effect, smite CN, LN, NE, NG at half effect (round down). No double effect versus anything in particular.


how about a paladin that doesn't have an alignment restriction, it loses some class features, has perhaps a general code (like: heal people that need it), but does not have a forced alignment.
I just hate alignment restrictions, they make even less sense to me than racial requirements.


Matt Stich wrote:
HappyDaze wrote:
Matt Stich wrote:
I'll second the Paladin love going around. I'd love to see (and play) a (CG)Paladin of Freedom or a (NG) Paladin of [forgot what it was called in 3.x]. Throw in a LE and a NE paladin and we got ourselves a party.
How about a true Neutral "paladin" of the Green Faith. Not a priestly druid, but a smiting badass of balance.
Who exactly would the smite target?

Elementals, Vermin, and Animals at full strength (Rebuke and correct), and Aberrations and Undead at double strength (destroy and purify).

Grand Lodge

HappyDaze wrote:
Bluescale wrote:


Also, a spontaneous casting magus archetype, for those who don't want to carry a spellbook around in the thick of combat and would actually like to use evocation spells from time to time (i.e. not an arcane duelist bard).

I, for one, would not like to see this. I don't think that every concept should be available as both prepared and spontaneous. I think that the magus is great as a strictly prepared caster and the bard is best kept exclusively as a spontaneous caster.

I actually think that I would rather see a Battle Sorcerer as a Bard Archetype. Now that the Archeologist has set the precedent for replacing the Bardic Music class ability in its entirety, I believe that we can do that for a Battle Sorcerer type.

I would not give them the same class features as, say a Magus, but something unique...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Purplefixer wrote:
Matt Stich wrote:
HappyDaze wrote:
Matt Stich wrote:
I'll second the Paladin love going around. I'd love to see (and play) a (CG)Paladin of Freedom or a (NG) Paladin of [forgot what it was called in 3.x]. Throw in a LE and a NE paladin and we got ourselves a party.
How about a true Neutral "paladin" of the Green Faith. Not a priestly druid, but a smiting badass of balance.
Who exactly would the smite target?
Elementals, Vermin, and Animals at full strength (Rebuke and correct), and Aberrations and Undead at double strength (destroy and purify).

I would think maybe Outsiders (in general) at full strength, Undead and Aberrations at double.


Matt Stich wrote:


I would think maybe Outsiders (in general) at full strength, Undead and Aberrations at double.

The judges will also accept maybe Outsiders (in general) at full strength, with Undead and Aberrations at double.


I'd like to see some sort of thrown weapon specialist, either as a fighter, or perhaps a Ranger style.

As for the person begging for a pugilist-style arch, did you read the Brawler archetype for Fighters? It sounds like exactly what you're asking for.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I have two:

Bladesinger (Magus)- a archetype for a light armor, dex based magus, how this didn't make it into Ultimate Magic or Ultimate Combat is beyond me.

Cloistered Cleric (cleric)- frankly the current archetype listed in Ultimate Magic sucks. There needs to be a better option for a cleric that has decreased weapon/armor ability and increased casting ability.


HappyDaze wrote:
Bluescale wrote:


Also, a spontaneous casting magus archetype, for those who don't want to carry a spellbook around in the thick of combat and would actually like to use evocation spells from time to time (i.e. not an arcane duelist bard).

I, for one, would not like to see this. I don't think that every concept should be available as both prepared and spontaneous. I think that the magus is great as a strictly prepared caster and the bard is best kept exclusively as a spontaneous caster.

The problem is that there is nothing currently that can let you be a spontaneous casting swordsman at 1st level unless you want to play an enchanter and buffer swordsman who by all rights should not be in melee (in other words, the bard). Sure, you can be a fighter who dips into sorcerer at 2nd level, but multiclassing like that means the DCs and damage for the spells will be lower than with a single class, not to mention that you would have to spend time and feats to even be able to cast in light armor (Arcane Armor Training at 3rd level for leather armor and below, Arcane Armor Mastery at 7th level for chain shirts and other "heavier" light armor).

For archetypes that can give more options for a spontaneous casting swordsman, you could have these archetypes, specifically created around the idea of using them in conjunction with the Arcane Duelist archetype (and I have no idea if these are balanced, I'm just coming up with them):

Specialist Bard: At first level, choose a specialization: Enchanter, Evoker, Illusionist, Conjurer, Necromancer, Diviner, Abjurer, Transmuter. Each of these specialists has a new spell list that replaces the standard bard spell list.

Arcanist: A bard who studies arcane lore at the cost of his ability to perform for others. Each time you learn a new performance, you may give up learning the performance in exchange for learning a spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list that you can cast at your current level. You do not have to exchange a bardic performance, and if you gain multiple performances at one level, you may choose to exchange any number of them. For instance, at first level, you could decide to permanently give up Fascinate and Distraction to add two spells from the sorcerer/wizard spell list to your spells known: 2 level one spells, 2 cantrips, or 1 level one spell and one cantrip. If you give up Dirge of Doom at 8th level, you could get a level three spell, level two spell, level one spell, or a cantrip in exchange. Spells acquired this way cannot be retrained.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Soluzar wrote:


Cloistered Cleric (cleric)- frankly the current archetype listed in Ultimate Magic sucks. There needs to be a better option for a cleric that has decreased weapon/armor ability and increased casting ability.

Why? Don't you like to be able to play a cleric with decreased weapon/armor ability and decreased spellcasting ability?

Why would anyone not like that?
[/sarcasm]

Dark Archive

I would like to see archetypes that deal with Eastern European themes. Something like orthodox monks (in the Byzantine Empire, monks were a huge political factor and they tended to mob whatever they didn't like and beat it to death with staffs), along the lines of monk class presented in upcoming Diablo 3, or Chuma (a witch that deals with diseases and is proficient with bows). Also, I'd like to see two weapon fighting archetype for barbarian, a forest knight type of archetype for ranger (something like druidic paladin) and a witch archetype that allows her to use Wisdom as base stat.

Scarab Sages

Arazyr wrote:

What I've been wanting to see since the APG came out is a good lightly-armored fighter archetype. Not necessarily a finesse fighter, just someone who can get by without being swathed in metal plates.

(Let me know if there is one and I just missed it...)

Ironically I just stop reading fighter archetypes that give up heavy armor proficiency. Its fair to say that we want different things from fighter archetypes.

What exactly is the difference between a lightly armored fighter and a rogue? Other than some cultural baggage.


Matthew Trent wrote:
Arazyr wrote:

What I've been wanting to see since the APG came out is a good lightly-armored fighter archetype. Not necessarily a finesse fighter, just someone who can get by without being swathed in metal plates.

(Let me know if there is one and I just missed it...)

Ironically I just stop reading fighter archetypes that give up heavy armor proficiency. Its fair to say that we want different things from fighter archetypes.

What exactly is the difference between a lightly armored fighter and a rogue? Other than some cultural baggage.

Full BAB.


leo1925 wrote:
Matthew Trent wrote:
Arazyr wrote:

What I've been wanting to see since the APG came out is a good lightly-armored fighter archetype. Not necessarily a finesse fighter, just someone who can get by without being swathed in metal plates.

(Let me know if there is one and I just missed it...)

Ironically I just stop reading fighter archetypes that give up heavy armor proficiency. Its fair to say that we want different things from fighter archetypes.

What exactly is the difference between a lightly armored fighter and a rogue? Other than some cultural baggage.

Full BAB.

Pretty much. It's part of the swashbuckler concept really, as well as the finesse fighter. We basically have two themes here:


  • The guy that doesn't rely on a steel shell for protection but speed and grace instead.
  • The guy that doesn't rely on a sharpened steel club for damage, but precision and speed instead.

Then we have the guy that does both of these at the same time.


Derek Vande Brake wrote:
And I'd still like a character reminiscent of the Doctor - a true skillmonkey, with no casting or combat abilities but has clever uses for skills others don't think of and always seems to have the materials at hand to solve any problem.

A Rogue archetype, perhaps? With a lower Sneak Attack dice or maybe a slowed Sneak Attack progression? Some kind of skill tricks that he can choose... What name would you give that 'Doctor' archyetype? I'm thinking something like Skillmaster.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

VM mercenario wrote:
Derek Vande Brake wrote:
And I'd still like a character reminiscent of the Doctor - a true skillmonkey, with no casting or combat abilities but has clever uses for skills others don't think of and always seems to have the materials at hand to solve any problem.
A Rogue archetype, perhaps? With a lower Sneak Attack dice or maybe a slowed Sneak Attack progression? Some kind of skill tricks that he can choose... What name would you give that 'Doctor' archyetype? I'm thinking something like Skillmaster.

The Doctor, especially the Eleventh, would be a bard with the mechanical equivalent of alchemist extracts instead of spells. He uses bardic knowledge and bardic performance (oratory) almost constantly.


Epic Meepo wrote:
VM mercenario wrote:
Derek Vande Brake wrote:
And I'd still like a character reminiscent of the Doctor - a true skillmonkey, with no casting or combat abilities but has clever uses for skills others don't think of and always seems to have the materials at hand to solve any problem.
A Rogue archetype, perhaps? With a lower Sneak Attack dice or maybe a slowed Sneak Attack progression? Some kind of skill tricks that he can choose... What name would you give that 'Doctor' archyetype? I'm thinking something like Skillmaster.
The Doctor, especially the Eleventh, would be a bard with the mechanical equivalent of alchemist extracts instead of spells. He uses bardic knowledge and bardic performance (oratory) almost constantly.

Highlighted for your convenience. Besides I like Rogues better than Bards.

Scarab Sages

leo1925 wrote:
Matthew Trent wrote:


What exactly is the difference between a lightly armored fighter and a rogue? Other than some cultural baggage.
Full BAB.

Uhh. I'm afraid I don't follow. BAB is more or less your skill at hitting things. 3/4 bab that rogues, inquisitors, magus, monks, druids, clerics, bards, and alchemists all use to hit things is what I consider better than average skill at attacking. And all those classes can and do hit things pretty well while still being reasonably distinct from the full bab classes of fighters, paladins, caviliers, rangers, and barbarians who are the best at hitting things.

I just can't see how a hypothetical swashbuckler could fail to occupy the same world space that is the rogue (especially given the versatility of some of rogue archetypes).

Mechanically, I can understand not liking the slower iterative progression, but really rogues are not so bad as you seem to be implying. The people who play them are often very bad (running around the battle in circles while stealthed is really shockingly ineffective) but I've seen skilled players create deathblenders.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Swashbucklers ARE supposed to be some of the best at hitting people. So yeah, full BAB.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Soluzar wrote:
Cloistered Cleric (cleric)- frankly the current archetype listed in Ultimate Magic sucks. There needs to be a better option for a cleric that has decreased weapon/armor ability and increased casting ability.

Came in here to post something similar. Not every cleric needs to be heavily armored; in fact, I would think that a lot of priests, especially those who worship peaceful deities, would be more thematically averse to front line combat. Would love the option to sacrifice weapon proficiency, heavy armor, and even a HD increment for more magic emphasis, more intrinsic support/buffing abilities, or some other unique powers (different forms of channelling energy? unlimited channel energy on single targets???).

Actually, a "priest" alternate class in the same vein as the samurai or ninja would be extraordinary.


VM mercenario wrote:
Swashbucklers ARE supposed to be some of the best at hitting people. So yeah, full BAB.

QFT. We are talking about a FIGHTER, not a thief. We want a front-liner that relies on skill over big chunks of metal, not a 2nd-rate backstabber.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

VM mercenario wrote:
Epic Meepo wrote:
VM mercenario wrote:
Derek Vande Brake wrote:
And I'd still like a character reminiscent of the Doctor - a true skillmonkey, with no casting or combat abilities but has clever uses for skills others don't think of and always seems to have the materials at hand to solve any problem.
A Rogue archetype, perhaps? With a lower Sneak Attack dice or maybe a slowed Sneak Attack progression? Some kind of skill tricks that he can choose... What name would you give that 'Doctor' archyetype? I'm thinking something like Skillmaster.
The Doctor, especially the Eleventh, would be a bard with the mechanical equivalent of alchemist extracts instead of spells. He uses bardic knowledge and bardic performance (oratory) almost constantly.
Highlighted for your convenience. Besides I like Rogues better than Bards.

Highlighted for your convenience.

Pathfinder has archetypes now; it is perfectly legit to propose a bard that replaces spells with gadget-related abilities.


*Eye-roll* No! What is this you say? Pathfinder now has archetypes? My I would never imagine such a think, me being in a thread about archetypes, talking about archetypes. Thank you, oh so ever kindly, my good sir.
And that's my sarcasm quota for the day. Now I won't argue with you any longer because: *deep breath*
1 - Views on a fictional character and how best to represent him are completely subjective. I will not agree with you and you will not agree with me independent of how well thought or formulated our arguments are, and I hope neither of us are too fanboy to realise that and we can let the silly argument of which class the Doctor is go by. Besides Mr Vande Brake did not ask about an archetype to faithfully, accurately or completely emulate the Doctor, just a facet of the character. I actually believe that it is completely impossible to faithfully emulate any character within the parameters of a class/levels based system, to do so you would need the freedom given by a more generic point buy system. I recommend GURPS.
2 - While some reflavored form of extracts or even bardic spells could be used to represent the many futuristic gadgets the Doctor has acces to and the powers of the sonic screwdriver, Mr. Vande Brake had asked about a true skill monkey archetype, and I thought that it would be reasonable to use a rogue for this idea since they already have the largest number of skill points of any class as well as several talentsd that deal directly with the uses of skills.
3 - I'm sorry to not have disclosed earlier, but I replied to that post because I liked Mr Vande Brakes idea and want to make a homebrew archetype based on it. I wanted to verify if he has any ideas of how such an archetype could/should be handled, either mechanically or flavorfully, that I could incorporate in my own early design. I don't care about an archetype on being the Doctor, I care about the skillmonkey archetype. The notion of what class exactly the Doctor should be has no actual bearing on this.

Also I really don't like bards. They're just bleh.

Scarab Sages

Dabbler wrote:
VM mercenario wrote:
Swashbucklers ARE supposed to be some of the best at hitting people. So yeah, full BAB.
QFT. We are talking about a FIGHTER, not a thief. We want a front-liner that relies on skill over big chunks of metal, not a 2nd-rate backstabber.

Going into the front lines without at least a breastplate (or a glowing magical ward) sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

I do not want such an option.

Also I love how you assert that swashbucklers are as good at hitting people as fighters without even suggesting an example to back up the statement but rather simply assert truth. Reminds me a bit of theology. :)


Matthew Trent wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
VM mercenario wrote:
Swashbucklers ARE supposed to be some of the best at hitting people. So yeah, full BAB.
QFT. We are talking about a FIGHTER, not a thief. We want a front-liner that relies on skill over big chunks of metal, not a 2nd-rate backstabber.

Going into the front lines without at least a breastplate (or a glowing magical ward) sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

I do not want such an option.

And not only do you not want such an option, you don't want anyone else to have one either! How noble of you.


Matthew Trent wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
VM mercenario wrote:
Swashbucklers ARE supposed to be some of the best at hitting people. So yeah, full BAB.
QFT. We are talking about a FIGHTER, not a thief. We want a front-liner that relies on skill over big chunks of metal, not a 2nd-rate backstabber.

Going into the front lines without at least a breastplate (or a glowing magical ward) sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

I do not want such an option.

Also I love how you assert that swashbucklers are as good at hitting people as fighters without even suggesting an example to back up the statement but rather simply assert truth. Reminds me a bit of theology. :)

Swashbucklers are based on renaissance era/pirate era. They are supposed to be master swordsmen and fencers, fast on their feet and fighting acrobatically, extremely charismatic and charming and never wearing much more than a silk shirt as armor.

Think D'Artagnan and the three musketeers, Zorro, and any pirate film. Jack Sparrow doesn't seem to be wearing any armor, does he?
All of these are frontliners, fighting without armor or magic, with fencing weapons (Zorro is the reason whips are finessable) and doing a pretty good show of it.

Dark Archive

Forgive me for not having read the PrC in a while, but is the Duelist not exactly the swashbuckler/fencer that everyone is talking about? I mean they get riposte and parry as class features for god's sake, wouldn't adding a fencer archetype to the fighter be redundant?


xn0o0cl3 wrote:
Forgive me for not having read the PrC in a while, but is the Duelist not exactly the swashbuckler/fencer that everyone is talking about? I mean they get riposte and parry as class features for god's sake, wouldn't adding a fencer archetype to the fighter be redundant?

Yeah, like adding the Magus was redundant when we had the Eldritch Knight PrC.

And for completeness I want to see prepared bards and summoners and spontaneous maguses and druids.

The Exchange

leo1925 wrote:
SunsetPsychosis wrote:
I'd personally like to see a sorcerer archetype along the lines of the old 3.5 Warmage. And I mean an actual archetype, not just a bloodline. Limited evocation-centric spell list, armored casting, bonus damage, stuff like that. Because sometimes when I play an arcane character I just want to nuke the hell out of everything.

Might i interest you to the magus?

Think about it for a second:
Limited evocation spell list: check
armored casting: check
bonus damage: check
can nova: check

Oh and on top of that it's a prepared caster and not a spontaneous one.

This isn't always a plus to everybody. While it is mechanically superior in most cases, sometimes the flavor just doesn't fit.

Speaking of which, I was hoping to see something along the lines of the Sage Sorcerer bloodline, for the Magus: an archetype that allows the Magus to cast spontaneously using Charisma. This, I think, would be an acceptable alternative to the 3.5 Warmage-inspired archetype SunsetPsychosis requested.


w0nkothesane wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
SunsetPsychosis wrote:
I'd personally like to see a sorcerer archetype along the lines of the old 3.5 Warmage. And I mean an actual archetype, not just a bloodline. Limited evocation-centric spell list, armored casting, bonus damage, stuff like that. Because sometimes when I play an arcane character I just want to nuke the hell out of everything.

Might i interest you to the magus?

Think about it for a second:
Limited evocation spell list: check
armored casting: check
bonus damage: check
can nova: check

Oh and on top of that it's a prepared caster and not a spontaneous one.

This isn't always a plus to everybody. While it is mechanically superior in most cases, sometimes the flavor just doesn't fit.

Speaking of which, I was hoping to see something along the lines of the Sage Sorcerer bloodline, for the Magus: an archetype that allows the Magus to cast spontaneously using Charisma. This, I think, would be an acceptable alternative to the 3.5 Warmage-inspired archetype SunsetPsychosis requested.

On flavor i can agree but i fear that if they do such an archetype (or alternative class) they will make it a lot weaker than the magus.

101 to 150 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Archetypes we would still like to see after UC All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.